Scientists have discovered a sugar compound from deep-sea bacteria that can destroy cancer cells in a dramatic way. This natural substance, produced by microbes living in the ocean, causes cancer cells to undergo a fiery form of cell death, essentially making them self-destruct. In lab tests and in mice with liver cancer, the compound not only stopped tumors from growing, but also activated the immune system to fight back. This finding could pave the way for entirely new cancer treatments based on sugars from marine organisms.
Let me explain. Our health care industry is part of our (mostly) global capitalist economy. That means investors demand the maximum profit the industry can produce. Imagine that this industry had the choice of providing an inexpensive one-time cure for cancer, or a long-term expensive treatment. Which option would generate the most profit for the industry? It doesn’t matter if there are people in the industry who would like to find a simple inexpensive cure. The board of directors is elected by the shareholders, which really means the largest and most ruthless capital owners. If the CEO or any officers approve research on an inexpensive cure that will threaten the profits of the corporation they will be ousted and replaced with someone who “sees the wisdom of using existing proven treatments”. So the built-in conflict of interest of a for-profit medical system means we will always be stuck with a system that extracts as much cash as possible from its patients.
Are there alternatives to this approach? Of course, but they depart from a pure capitalist system, and so, at least in the US, we will never see them as long as we accept our current economic structure.
There’s more than one pharmaceutical company. Providing a better cure than your competitors allows you to take their customers. Hence increasing your market share and your profit.
People would be willing to pay more for the one time cure than for the long term therapy. And since the cure is so cheap to make, presumably cheaper than the traditional therapy, the cheap cure can be sold at an even greater profit than the traditional therapy.
You need to remember that the global capitalist economy is not one team.
Let me explain. Our health care industry is part of our (mostly) global capitalist economy. That means investors demand the maximum profit the industry can produce. Imagine that this industry had the choice of providing an inexpensive one-time cure for cancer, or a long-term expensive treatment. Which option would generate the most profit for the industry? It doesn’t matter if there are people in the industry who would like to find a simple inexpensive cure. The board of directors is elected by the shareholders, which really means the largest and most ruthless capital owners. If the CEO or any officers approve research on an inexpensive cure that will threaten the profits of the corporation they will be ousted and replaced with someone who “sees the wisdom of using existing proven treatments”. So the built-in conflict of interest of a for-profit medical system means we will always be stuck with a system that extracts as much cash as possible from its patients.
Are there alternatives to this approach? Of course, but they depart from a pure capitalist system, and so, at least in the US, we will never see them as long as we accept our current economic structure.
Two things wrong with this:
You need to remember that the global capitalist economy is not one team.