Biomedical research is only as good as its delivery. Distribution of medicines by charities is no more than a stopgap.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
It is false to suggest that medical breakthroughs come only through government research.
In an ideal world, the amount of money we spend on medical research to prevent or cure a disease would be proportional to its seriousness and the number of people who suffer from it.
A lot of medicines are not there to cure diseases. That's fine - drugs that keep people alive who wouldn't otherwise be alive are useful. What I object to is the drug companies' advertising, which you see everywhere in the U.S., which claims that they are curing diseases when they're not.
Pharmaceutical companies have invested hundreds of millions of dollars in new HIV/AIDS treatments not out of altruism but because they can make up those research costs in sales.
As soon as we find a cure, we will utilize any of the donations to go toward providing medication to those who can't afford it. That is my goal.
Reducing the price of cancer drugs is a humanitarian move.
In general, drug companies are reasonably good at developing new treatments, and there's also a lot of good in the industry.
Stem cell research can revolutionize medicine, more than anything since antibiotics.
The biotech game is quickly changing. The people must demand their use of these treatments.
Modern medical advances have helped millions of people live longer, healthier lives. We owe these improvements to decades of investment in medical research.
No opposing quotes found.