That’s the lenient interpretation I’d hope.
But we’re not an alternative medicine group or anything. If you look into their shareholder meetings the public info seems to be that they judge whether investments are worth it by potential return on investment, and well a lifelong treatment is always going to be more profitable for them than a cure.
Completely true. But there would be fewer of them.
It’s crazy that when my research team comes up with a therapeutic target we believe might lead to curing a disease, we get crickets from drug companies. But when we present therapeutic targets for long term treatment, we get lots of interest.
Although it’s true that nurses can have some fucked up beliefs, don’t underestimate doctors. Some of my colleagues are ableist, misogynistic, bigoted, power hungry, with a superiority complex. I think these are the kind of Gps and specialists making r/medicine so awful.
That aside, as a medical professional, I have to say r/medicine is such a cesspool of a subreddit, and I don’t say this lightly.
They regularly ridicule patients and specific conditions, harbour prejudiced views towards poor people and people from minority groups, and generally push pseudoscientific nonsense.
It’s a really disheartening subreddit to visit when you’ve got your patient’s best interests at heart.
Apart from that, I do agree with their view on UnitedHealth’s CEO.
Crispr is the exception:
Most proposals for cures are a fairly simple (and cheap) therapeutic target that will only work for one condition or even just a subset of cases within that condition.