Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.

Anonymous
Anonymous asked in Politics & GovernmentOther - Politics & Government · 1 decade ago

why does our government allow drug companies to make drugs that harm us?

It's like there's a new drug in the market, it's on commercials....then after a few months or years, it's called off the shelfs or has some really bad side effects. I'm sure our government isn't really nice to the american people if they want the drug companies money over our health.

12 Answers

Relevance
  • 1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    Drug companies pay alot of money to the AMA and the FDA in terms of lobbying, advertising, business luncheons, vacations (I mean conventions,oops), commissions (doctors)even out right payments; you know, research fees and such. They pay so much infact that these officials and doctors can become distracted with all of the travel arrangements, picking out color palets, and sailing that they forget to do the nessecary research to determine if the drug company's claims are true. So pressed against the deadline they go ahead and take the drug company's word. After all, why would anyone who is SOOOOO nice lie about the effects of their products?

    For the drug companys part, most of the people which lobby have not even been confronted with any negative data. So there is little moral dillemma. Most of the clinical trials don't really ask the sort of questions which would yeild any real efficacy, only that it can not DIRECTLY be attributed to negative side effects. If it does and If there was any knowledge beforehand, the decision would be made by some Director/VP/CEO, who in his greed and lust for power, white washed the data. Once the drug is released and approved it usually does act as predicted. Killing so many, maiming so many, giving so many diarreah, making so many tire ALLL the time. But, companies can't by definition make a product which would knowingly be harmful. So Lawyers waiting since the day the drug was released collect the victims and file suit.

    "The company is not and should not be held liable for one person's bad judgement." So they pick the lowest on the totem pole and crucify him, or push him in front of a bus, pay a huge sum of money and keep on keeping on. Thing is, the sum of money is nowhere near what they made.

    There are doctors, and Federal Officials who truly believe they are helping, so this isn't a blanket statment of condemnation. This is, however, how bad drugs get to the market.

  • 1 decade ago

    Given the experimental nature of the whole pharmaceutical industry, its pretty hard to know every single side affect that might affect 1 or two people in every million. Thats why the goverment has guidelines. If the drug can meet them, then the drug can be marketed. This doesn't mean that the drug is 100 percent safe. You know this because you hear constant warnings on every drug commercial you see. It isn't anyones 'fault' when things go bad, its part of how that industry works. A lot of times the drug's benefits are worth risks. Sometimes side effects dont surface until the drug is exposed to lots of people. Saying its the 'greedy government' isn't exactly looking at the problem from all directions.

  • Good question.

    Better question, why does the CDC allow those drugs to be marketed in the first place?

    To be fair, there is no way that any one can tell if a drug is completely safe or not. In my own case, medications often have the opposite effect that the doctor tells me they have. E.g., I have difficulty staying awake. I was prescribed a medication that was supposed to help me stay awake, but within 5 minutes of taking the medication, I was sound asleep!

    They need to change the system; consumer input is completely lacking; consumer input is crucial. While everyone is different, I have had so many problems due to medications that MY input should be allowed; there will be others that have the same problem.

    Source(s): life
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Reagan decided that an FDA that did its job seemed too much like a socialist agency, so he appointed someone who would have it rubber-stamp aspartame without adequate testing. It's been downhill ever since. A government that deregulates capitalism allows all kinds of malfeasance, misfeasance, and outright fraud.

    Strider: Based on your recommendation, I visited Ron Paul's website, and after reading the section on healthcare, I see that I was justified in my assumption that no matter how populist conservatives pretend to be, they will merely give us more of the scams that were wrought by Reagan and the more than twenty-five years of bipartisan deregulation he introduced. When I see Nixon's HMO scam used as a rationalization against socialized medicine, I am reminded of McCain's favorite (and self-describing) word: disingenuous. Eliminating the control of the insurance racket is equivalent to empowering the insurance racket? Cut me a break!

    Source(s): Mr. Taco is right. Only a minority of us were wise to Reagan's scams and voted for Carter and Mondale. As long as the majority of Americans are suckers who believe every lie con-servative artists tell them, nothing will change. All scamsters have charisma. Learn to recognize them BEFORE it's too late.
  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 1 decade ago

    The government makes money off everything we buy, and they lose money whenever they prevent us from buying anything. Even if it harms us "its all for the greater cause" like the iraq war. Vote for Ron Paul. A presidential candidate who follows the constitution and plans to eliminate the bonds between major companies and the government, that only benefit the upper class. Believe me. This guy is what America needs.

    Source(s): www.ronpaul2008.com www.youtube.com
  • 1 decade ago

    Another cause besides money, which is the biggest undoubtedly, is the use of animals as testing. I'm not part of the PETA and I'm no advocating. I just wanted to let you know that animals bodies are affected differently on some medications than humans and it has been known that when it tests ok on animals, it can have devastating effects on humans. Most medications aren't tested thoroughly either, that takes years and who wants to wait that long to make money?

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    because the drug companies give lots of money to government figures like george bush.

  • 1 decade ago

    It is money, plain and simple, but honestly, blaming the government is lame. The power is in the hands of the people. All they have to do is say "enough is enough" and vote accordingly. Collectively, everything the government screws up is our own fault.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Your question assumes that drug companies are interested in making your health better.

    They are not.

    They are interested in selling you something and the more they can sell, the more they profit.

    That's capitalism.

  • 1 decade ago

    HELLO!!!! how do you thing they make their money(billions) its called the hidden persuaders!!!!!, get people to think they need all these drug's and WOW the drug companies make billions!!!!! figure it out yet??????

    Source(s): good grief a few months back, they convinced alot of people that they had restless leg syndrome????? never heard about that before they came out with a drug that dose nothing but put you to sleep and ralax, otherwise normal muscles!!!!
Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.