In trials

  • SCB@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I didn’t downvotes you for a disagreement, but because you’re spreading false conspiracy theories in a science community.

    Also I get downvotes for saying true things people don’t like all the time. It isn’t a big deal.

    • sigmaklimgrindset
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Sure, I’m spreading conspiracy theories. Not like I left chronic disease research and restarted in a completely unrelated field for this exact problem.

      I didn’t work for Pfizer, but I did work for another pharmaceutical company you would recognize the name of if you live in North America. And let me tell you, while the labs are trying to do good, the executives and management are rotten to the core. Unless it’s a life threatening infectious disease, they will not prioritize the research. It’s not active suppression most of the time, it’s willful negligence and underfunding. I got into the field hopeful, and left jaded.

      • SCB@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s not active suppression most of the time,

        This is your initial claim, though.

        • sigmaklimgrindset
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Also, apologies if I come off as aggressive at any point, I still have a lot of residual anger over what I experienced with my former career.

        • sigmaklimgrindset
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          No, my initial claim was:

          Curing diabetes isn’t as profitable as selling insulin. That’s why it doesn’t get funded.

          Then you opined that whoever comes up with a cure wins, which should be true in a perfect world. In fact, most researchers would agree with you.

          Unfortunately, a lot of MBA’s in these pharma companies don’t see it that way, and my reply to you was trying to outline the realities of that. I focussed more on the patent-and-bury part because this is the one method less known to the public (and less used), but underfunding research that can do a public good but isn’t profitable is a common technique by corporations in research, regardless of the discipline.

          My bad, I thought this was common knowledge, but it probably isn’t for people who aren’t in PhD/post-doc research roles.