Al Borealis, Universal Health Care Trap? |478|

If you believe that cannabis oil is going to cure people with late stage cancer, I don't know what more to say.

Worse still if you further believe that big pharma is deliberately obfuscating the magical healing power of cannabis oil in order to maintain profits.

I have nothing against cannabis, btw. In fact I occasionally use it when arthritis in my ankle acts up. Sometimes I just use it to relax.

But here's the point, if cannabis, or any other treatment, really would save all that money and make people healthy at the same, then the people I work for/with would be all over it. We, insurance, do not want to pay for treatments that are expensive, unnecessary and/or represent health risks, especially if there are better approaches. Remember, we make money when our claims expense (what we pay out) is low. If we save money while increasing quality/patient outcomes we can lower premiums and compete better in the market while keeping some of the savings as profit.

I spent several years working on understanding the diagnoses and medical procedures and tech trends, etc. that are driving our costs. I worked with our Medical Directors (doctors that work for insurance) to identify the most affordable, but effective, means of treating patients (our covered lives who became ill). We study millions of members to understand what treatments work for which members, which doctors/hospitals are providing effective treatments, how to incentivize quality affordable care for the most people. All of that scientifically determined information is used to build our benefit structures and utilization management programs (what procedure we will cover for which conditions). I do something else now, but I know that work intimately. Most people don't know that insurance is doing that kind of research all the time. Trust me, we are not approving - meaning paying for - treatments that cost too much and don't work as wlell as a less costly alternative.

We are in no way partners with big pharma. We are their adversaries if anything. We provide a check on their attempts to peddle ineffective costly drugs.
I do not consider Silence to be a troll - he just seems to not appreciate the whacky dogmatic BS that flies around here anymore than I do.
That about covers it.

I really enjoy reading counter-mainstream perspectives when they include a well structured argument supported by some degree of evidence or demonstrable personal expertise (i.e., Eric's professional background when he speaks on issues such as those in this thread). Otherwise, there's no basis to take a perspective as "just so". Its not combative or trollish; just uncomfortable for dogmatists.
Hi Eric, dont take it personally mate : )

200'000 dollars per cancer patient x billions of cancer patients
Of course big pharma would never suppress anything that got in the way of that kind of cash. . hilarious :)
As for terminal cancer patients, maybe go and find some people that were sent home to die by hospitals, went on to proper cannabis oil from outdoor plants and are now cancer free and happy as larry, years later. Obviously the earlier people start taking it the better the chances of full recovery.
I only brought cannabis oil up as an example though. There is a lot of other natural medicine out there. I think the crunch is what i asked at the end of my last post which you didnt answer,
'How much money has been spent by big pharma on research into naturally derived medicine compared to research into patentable synthetics (very often 'copied' from isolated organic substances) and big machines?'
Also i would like to ask the same question above for the case of the insurance industry.
I suppose the same question should apply to university funding.
Aproximate figures would be fine if you could.
Lets say that i thought that synthetic medicine was the way forward and was really good, which i dont (for me it's emergency use only for lack of anything else). Anyway even if i agreed with big pharma medicine, the fact that companies often have what they consider a cure but dont make it commercially available as it is more profitable to release at a later date (many years sometimes) while people are dying left right and centre in the meantime, is criminal, even if legislation covers them.
Regarding the debate in this forum as to what kind of system (NHS style, insurance based etc) is best i'm trying to keep an open mind until i have looked into it more. I did see this though this morning, which seems pretty out of order:
At the same time NHS often has huge long waiting lists and very often shoddy medical treatment as doctors and nurses are understaffed and rushed of their feet. Also nurses get really low salaries and then people wonder why they cant recruit enough nurses.
As far as big pharma goes though you do realize i'm never going to stop bugging you now regarding this subject as have looked into it over the years and can see how bad it really is.
Here is a small example as to how big pharma often work. The minutes halfway down the article from a 2012 FDA VRBPAC meeting are particularly telling
Last edited:
Here is a documentary about cannabis oil. Bear in mind that the guy who made the documentary is not an expert on cannabis oil or a medical doctor. Just a guy with a garden and the will to help people. His documentary is quite insightful though. Sadly multi trillion pound medical industries make no effort and it is down to grassroots to do anything about it