Groopman's Essay On Immunotherapy

Improvements in health care and life sciences are an important source of gains in health and longevity globally. The development of innovative pharmaceutical products plays a critical role in ensuring these continued gains. To encourage the continued development of new drugs, economic incentives are essential. These incentives are principally provided through direct and indirect government funding, intellectual property laws, and other policies that favor innovation. Without such incentives, private corporations, which bring to market the vast majority of new drugs, would be less able to assume the risks and costs necessary to continue their research and development (R&D). In the United States, government action has focused on creating the environment that would best encourage further innovation and yield a constant flow of new and innovative medicines to the market. The goal has been to ensure that consumers would benefit both from technological breakthroughs and the competition that further innovation generates. The United States also relies on a strong generic pharmaceutical industry to create added competitive pressure to lower drug prices. Recent action by the Administration and Congress has accelerated the flow of generic medicines to the market for precisely that reason. By contrast, in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and

Authors who are not from the scientific community appear to be more assertive about their claims as compared to experts of the field. In the following rhetorical analysis, I explore the differences in original research articles tailored toward experts and pop science articles which target a general audience. The pop science article is, “Immune System, Unleashed by Cancer Therapies, Can Attack Organs”, written by Matt Richtel of the New York Times. I compare this with the original research article, “Checkpoint blockade cancer immunotherapy targets tumour-specific mutant antigens” by Gubin et al., published in Nature journal. Both articles talk about the cutting-edge research in the field of cancer immunotherapy. Cancer immunotherapy gets rid of tumors by using the body’s immune system to target cancer cells. Gubin et al.’s article uses genomics and bioinformatics to compare therapeutic synthetic long-peptide vaccines with the working of immunotherapy drugs. Richtel’s article discusses the

Thesis: An examination of the case study New Protocol: How Drug’s Rebirth as Treatment for Cancer Fueled Price Rises relies heavily on a keen understanding of the social and economic implications of a capitalist system, and once taken into account it is clear that Celgene Corp. is justified in raising prices based on the business market philosophies asserted by

Washington, H. A. (2011). Flacking for Big Pharma: Drugmakers Don't Just Compromise Doctors; They Also Undermine the Top Medical Journals and Skew the Findings of Medical Research. (cover story). American Scholar, 80(3), 22. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Known as one of the world’s most deadly diseases, second only to heart disease, cancer is a well known killer. Cancer is a disease mankind has been burdened with since the first documented records of human existence (“The History of Cancer”). Until the early 1900s, cancer was exclusively treated with surgery, which didn’t usually yield very effective results. Only recently have doctors reached a point where they can use drug therapies to suppress the disease. Relative to humans, cancer treatments are very new. Because the market for pharmaceutical drugs is so new, they lack many regulations and pricing guidelines. This allows these new companies to create a drug and place almost any price on it. The system in place can very easily be taken

1.) Basically, Gladwell leads the reader back and forth through time, and through the history of cancer research. It begins with trials and failures of commonly used drugs and treatments, all with limited to no success. Then new, un-thought of experimental, multi pronged treatments, which attacked cancers on multiple fronts, were developed. At first too powerful, then reduced, tweaked and perfected, these new multi-pronged treatments became a cancer fighting force to be reckoned with. Demolishing childhood leukemia in its first few bouts. Then a cellular biologist who figured that mass screen testing was not utilized massively enough, decided he was going to collect man-made compounds

Sidney Farber being alive seemed to have affected much of the cancer world miraculously and reading about such an intelligent individual who has impacted much of cancer and medicine world surprised me. Nevertheless, what surprised me and left a remarkable memory in my mind was how Farber’s death affected cancer. In detail, I felt surprised due to wondering how one man’s death could have caused a slowing to the discovery of a cure for cancer, “Theories were shattered; drug discoveries stagnated; trials languished; and academic meetings degenerated in all-out brawls.” (Mukherjee 193). Notably, Farber’s death made me realize how

Cancer immunotheraphy is a concept that has been around for centuries. Back in the 1800s, a bone surgeon named William Coley injected his patients with a vaccine consisting of killed bacteria hoping it would stimulate the body's defense system. During the 1990s, physicians treated people with cancer with a cytokine treatment. This treatment involved high amounts of interleuken-2 (IL-2) and interferon-γ (IFNγ), also known as inflammatory cytokines. These inflammatory cytokines were released by white blood cells that fight infection (T cells). However, this treatment can have very dangerous side effects such as vascular leakage and kidney damage, but some people that received the cytokine treatment have lived for decades. In the year of 1996,

In Jerry Grillo’s article on “Real Science, Impact,” it talks about how Biotechnology is known for helping people. It involves the development of vaccines, therapeutic devices, and medicines. People can find jobs easily in this field and make good money. It also talks about how the research team is testing out new drugs that help’s with the immune system to help fight tumors. The medication itself is expensive. The company that created the drug had a poor second-quarter financial report. The stock tumbled overnight. The research team has been focused on cancer and finding a cure for it. More than one company is currently working on creating antibiotics, vaccines, and more. Research companies are contributing billions of dollars in tax profits

After learning about the works of conventional medicine natural treatments will seem to be a miracle. A German cancer doctor named Johanna Budwig has cured many terminally ill and even said to be ¨incurable” patients who had been sent home to die. Budwing cured many types of cancer, even in their rarest form. She even had a cure rate of 90% no matter how aggressive the sickness was. Two of Budwig’s biggest weapons against cancer are quark cheese and flaxseed oil. The two natural ingredients killed the cancer without killing the patient, unlike your average doctor. In result, Budwig quickly became a rival to many pharmaceutical companies. This statement made by doctor Johanna gives evidence on the greed that goes into the medical industry. “I have the answer to cancer, but American doctors

Andrew Moulden: Every Vaccine Produces Harm”. A question remaining posed after his death why the name of this brilliant researcher and his life’s work had nearly been deleted from the internet. Is his discoveries inconvenient for large firms, or undermine large firms business?

Cancer is figured to be the second leading causes of morbidity and mortality worldwide. With approximately 14 million new cases and 8.2 million cancer related deaths in 2012, alone .Why are so many people stuck suffering with this deadly disease? Millions of dollars have been invested into cancer research, yet there is no cure. Are these pharmaceutical companies focus on finding a cure for cancer or concentrating on elongated treatments in order to lengthen their pockets? We must first understand that cancer is big business earning huge profits. Nonetheless, the cancer industry is spending virtually zilch of its multi-billion dollar resources on effective prevention strategies, like dietary guidelines, exercise, natural remedies and herbs proven to cure cancer. Instead, it pours its money into treating cancer, not preventing or allaying it.

Cancer. We all know someone who has suffered from it or has passed away because of it. Cancer now affects one in every three people, and is the second highest cause of death in the United States. For decades, the medical community has been on the hunt for a cure for cancer, and have been subjected to intense ridicule from the public because of a lack of progression toward a possible cure. In recent years, many scientists, doctors, researchers, and the general public have come to believe that the cure for cancer is being suppressed because of this lack of progress. Those who say it is suppressed claim that the drugs used to treat cancer actually cause cancer, making a patient sicker and sicker. As a result, the patients are forced to spend

Another claim against immunization is personal opposition to big pharmaceutical companies. Some believe vaccines are charged to patients solely for profit. This pharmaceutical profit-motive can call into question product safety and integrity. The overwhelming majority of vaccines are not highly profitable though (Lam). Due to the massive investment of time and funds required to create vaccines, coupled with only marginal returns on this investment, pharmaceutical corporations do not focus on them. As result, nonprofit health organizations and political agencies such as the CDC, and the WHO, generally lead the charge in vaccine development. It is a real danger that companies will stop developing vaccines altogether (Lam). Drug companies instead concentrate on well, drugs. Continuous treatment medications require patients to purchase repeatedly, until it is no longer necessary. (In some cases, patients may even take certain drugs until death.) The time interval of vaccinations is, at the very least, yearly. In the case of the flu, rather than one flu shot, pharmaceutical companies can profit more from selling antivirals, painkillers, and a host of other treatments to patients that contract viral sickness. Medications, rather than cures are economically desirable. As a biochemistry student myself, upon graduating I face the decision between conducting decent paying scientific research or developing pharmaceuticals with the opportunity of making upwards of $200,000 a year for

Although R&D has been retained by the large pharmaceutical firms, there has been a continuous decline in the R&D productivity. Controlling R&D is imperative to the success of a Pharmaceutical firm. However, as the pharmaceutical industry is maturing, there are diminishing returns to the R&D investment. Fewer and fewer blockbuster drugs are being discovered and therefore R&D is not the most value adding component in the value