Bupe Why do all Bupe Drs knowingly lie about bupe having little to no side effects and having "no withdrawal"

[DeathIndustrial88]

Yea there is absolutely corruption but not to the degree you imply nor at the areas you seem to think it is. I can tell you haven't had experience in research because you'd have a far different perspective

Downplaying is not the same as having a realistic perspective

I'm an opioid addict today thanks to this exact corruption & still have to suffer for it.

But you probably make good money from this kind of corruption, so of course you'll defend it.
Must be good money if you can't see it from my perspective.

 

[someguyontheinternet]

I don't make shit, I'm a grad student doing research

Corruption comes from profit incentives in pharma, there's a greater deal on that side of the industry and its more direct. On the government side it comes from politics decided what types of research gets funded

 

[DeathIndustrial88]

I don't make shit, I'm a grad student doing research

Corruption comes from profit incentives in pharma, there's a greater deal on that side of the industry and its more direct. On the government side it comes from politics decided what types of research gets funded

But I thought I was the stupid one when I said the government is involved with the medical literature?

And now you're saying they get to decide what gets funded due to political reasons?
Yeah that's exactly what I said & pointed out, that the American healthcare system puts profit over human lives. And how do they do that? By fudging the "science" to be in favor of whatever medicine they're trying to sell. Which means whatever fake bullshit they come up with, will then be regurgitated by uninformed doctors & pharmacists.

You're basically saying exactly what I said except it was "wrong" coming from me & not you, because you're clearly a genius.

And yeah I'm totally gonna think my pharmacist & psychiatrist who can't even pronounce "buprenorphine", know more about it than I do, when I literally study it out of passion & not to get paid for it.

 

[someguyontheinternet]

No I said you're wrong about corruption be so prevalent. The majority is not fudging research like you seem to be implying, which is what I said from the start

Yea man all medical research is bad, corrupt, and wrong that's why zero progress is ever made in the medical field

 

[DeathIndustrial88]

No I said you're wrong about corruption be so prevalent. The majority is not fudging research like you seem to be implying, which is what I said from the start

Yea man all medical research is bad, corrupt, and wrong that's why zero progress is ever made in the medical field

You're the one claiming I even said anything about it's prevalence. I said it merely exists & happens.

But if you wanna talk about prevalence....

Vioxx
Bextra
Zyvox
Lyrica
Darvocet
Gabapentin
Suboxone
Tramadol
Oxycontin
SSRIs
Thalidomide
etc..etc..

All drugs that were pushed through to market through bullshit research & flat out "corruption", which you say isn't very prevalent though, right?

Didn't pfizer get slapped with a 1.3 billion dollar fine? Gee, sounds like small beans in terms of corruption to me /s

"The size and seriousness of this resolution, including the huge criminal fine of $1.3 billion, reflect the seriousness and scope of Pfizer's crimes," said Mike Loucks, acting U.S. Attorney for the District of Massachusetts. "Pfizer violated the law over an extensive time period.

Justice Department Announces Largest Health Care Fraud Settlement in Its History​

Pfizer to Pay $2.3 Billion for Fraudulent Marketing

Justice Department Announces Largest Health Care Fraud Settlement in Its History

American pharmaceutical giant Pfizer Inc. and its subsidiary Pharmacia & Upjohn Company Inc. (hereinafter together “Pfizer”) have agreed to pay $2.3 billion, the largest health care fraud settlement in the history of the Department of Justice, to resolve criminal and civil liability arising from...

www.justice.gov

And that's literally ONE pharmaceutical company. Yeah, that corruption isn't prevalent though, not at all.

I just love when you mother fuckers on here have such fragile egos that you need to jump on my posts & say "no you're wrong!".... And then 10 pages of replies later, basically say the exact same shit that I said, only in a slightly different way. And also have to insinuate and put words in mouth rather than admit that I wasn't wrong about anything. This is like the 5th person to do this in the past 2 months on here. Ya'll are so obsessed with trying to seem "smarter" and "more educated" than whatever person you decide to target that you're willing to ignore facts & reality as to not hurt your ego.

Besides, wasn't your original claim that I was "wrong" because "i don't know science"?....
Now you've changed it to "oh well you are right but you're implying it's more prevalent than it really is".. Gee, that doesn't' fit with the whole "you're wrong cause you don't know science" spiel you were going with earlier.

 

[someguyontheinternet]

Did you read the part where I said there's a profit incentive in private industry? Also that's a pretty small number of drugs out of all the other approved ones that are fine, so that's some dandy cherry picking

Your framing about prevalence is that all doctors and all pharmacists don't know shit and all research in corrupt while you, the almighty and all knowing addict, who researches out of love definitely knows way more. Who's the one trying to seem smart here?

What sort of research do you do? Do you write papers or do you read them? Or are you doing research by reading mommy blogs and watching YouTube videos? How do you define research?

 

[DeathIndustrial88]

Oh look, more corruption you said doesn't exist..

Purdue Lawsuits

Justice Department Announces Global Resolution of Criminal and Civil Investigations with Opioid Manufacturer Purdue Pharma and Civil Settlement with Members of the Sackler Family

Today, the Department of Justice announced a global resolution of its criminal and civil investigations into the opioid manufacturer Purdue Pharma LP (Purdue), and a civil resolution of its civil investigation into individual shareholders from the Sackler family. The resolutions with Purdue are...

www.justice.gov

Reckit Benckiser Lawsuits

Justice Department Obtains $1.4 Billion from Reckitt Benckiser Group in Largest Recovery in a Case Concerning an Opioid Drug in United States History

Global consumer goods conglomerate Reckitt Benckiser Group plc (RB Group) has agreed to pay $1.4 billion to resolve its potential criminal and civil liability related to a federal investigation of the marketing of the opioid addiction treatment drug Suboxone. The resolution – the largest...

www.justice.gov

Teva Lawsuits

Teva agrees to pay $126 million to US hospitals over opioids

Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd has agreed to pay up to $126 million to U.S. hospitals over 18 years to settle claims that its marketing of opioid drugs raised the hospitals' operating costs.

www.reuters.com

Sun Pharma Lawsuits

https://www.fiercepharma.com/pharma/after-dismissal-slapdown-sun-and-taro-fork-over-75m-settle-price-fixing-claims

And on and on.... But yeah it's totally not prevalent at all.....


Yeah keep deflecting with your stupid questions dude. Sorry to hurt your little spoiled trust fund baby ego.

PS : We're literally on a thread about doctors knowingly pushing Suboxone as "withdrawal free" (corruption) & yet you still don't see the irony in your ridiculous statements.

 

[someguyontheinternet]

I literally study it out of passion & not to get paid for it.

So where do you do your studying again? Which sources do you use?

 

[Hexenstahl]

Exactly, because their job is to diagnose and treat your condition, not to have in-depth knowledge of the properties of the medications they prescribe, beyond which condition they're indicated for. That's why hospitals have clinical pharmacists.

This is where I tend to go with Noam Chomsky and his stance on this terrible thing called division of labor. Our educational system has created an army of "Fachidioten" (I think one-track specialist would be the english term that comes closest to the meaning of the word). Physicians actually used to have, in fact were required to have, lots of knowledge on the properties of the medications they prescribe, because they knew that if not, we'd end up in a system like the one we have right now, where the the combination of naloxone and bupe (suboxone) was just a way for a pharmacomp to get a new patent and convince these pharmacologically clueless doctors that it is '"abuse proof", which was a full success only because these doctors were/are ignorant on the fact that naloxone does nothing when combined with bupe due to bupe having a notably higher binding affinity. That's what makes division of labor so dangerous. Modern doctors are little more than coat wearing drug dealers (mostly, not all ofc, and also not in all instances). The same is true for almost all jobs. The work that a pharmaceutical/medicinal chemist does, used to be done by a pharmacist not too long ago. He actually had three jobs combined in one: he was a pharmacist, a chemist and an apothecary all at the same time (we use the terms pharmacist and apothecary differently here in Germany, where the pharmacist is basically a drug researcher and is therefore considered a scientific profession, whereas an apothecary prepares and dispenses those drugs). I think we need to get away from this one-degree system of learning, and instead move towards a holistic 360-degree system of learning. Overspecialization is harmful as seen by the example I provided above.

So many people in the past used to be polymaths, but today this tendency to achieve proficiency in multiple disciplines is decried and mocked as "jack of all trades but master of none". Well...really? I don't think so. I've made my B.Sc. in (Corporate) Finance and am both in theory as well as in practice quite proficient in this discipline (but I always consider myself a lifelong student in all areas I study), have minored in system theory (no, not the computer science definition, but the interdisciplinary field that deals with what systems are, how they work and the types of systems, like self-organizing/self-replicating/self-perpetuating systems and how that knowledge can be used in literally every area in life to create better system procedures; that was ofc a grossly oversimplified definition) and am still learning everything I can about this fascinating subject in my free time. And now, recently, I have taken on a new field of science, namely organic chemistry and am studying that too. So all in all, I'm studying three subjects all the time and I just can't see how that is limiting. If anything it actually increases your understanding of the world and even better: you can apply principles that one area shares with another, to that other area and gain an even deeper understanding that way. So why can't somebody like me work part time as, say a controller in a company (finance), an organizational architect/designer (systems science; and yes, that job actually does exist) and then also as a pharmaceutical chemist. Our educational system is so incredibly self-limiting unfortunately.
What is your opinion on this whole matter UltimateFixx?

 

[jasperkent]

I've been prescribed bupe for MAT and I never heard a doctor tell me there were "little to no side effects and no withdrawal."
This was about 15 years ago-- have things changed?

 

[TheUltimateFixx]

@Hexenstahl, I think you're not taking into account just how much extra medical knowledge we have accumulated, and how many treatment methods we've developed since those days. Nobody now for instance could be a 'general surgeon' because the scope that covers is far too vast.
You spend on average 7 years at med school as it is just to qualify as a general practitioner, then according to your specialty (if you should decide to pursue one) an extra 3-5 years on top of THAT.

I think specialisation in the medical / pharmaceutical field is basically necessary and also what inevitably had to happen (because of the aforementioned ever-increasing mountains of specialized knowledge). Where I see a distinct problem is that the different people any given patient sees very often tend not to sufficiently communicate with each other, ie sharing notes and info on that patient, etc.

 

[Jen X]

I've been prescribed bupe for MAT and I never heard a doctor tell me there were "little to no side effects and no withdrawal."
This was about 15 years ago-- have things changed?

When i microdosed from methadone to suboxone earlier this year the doctor didn't tell me of any side effects. Said it was easier to get off then methadone. I got off it because it caused me anxiety and i read about how it rots your teeth. I think with the fentanyl problem they are just happy to get people off of that. Definitely safer then street fent. When i started methadone years ago they didn't tell me of the long withdrawal either. I had to tell my doctor about microdosing. They see so many patients where i am so probably don't have time to thoroughly go over everything

 

[jasperkent]

Said it was easier to get off then methadone.

For me this part is very true.
Bupe was A LOT easier to get off of than methadone-- because I love methadone and I hate bupe. Bupe gave me anxiety plus a generally icky unwell feeling. Methadone, on the other hand, is one of my favorite opioids because of its long legs.
But yes, methadone WD takes forever and the Dr warned me about that, too.

 

[Hexenstahl]

@Hexenstahl, I think you're not taking into account just how much extra medical knowledge we have accumulated, and how many treatment methods we've developed since those days. Nobody now for instance could be a 'general surgeon' because the scope that covers is far too vast.
You spend on average 7 years at med school as it is just to qualify as a general practitioner, then according to your specialty (if you should decide to pursue one) an extra 3-5 years on top of THAT.

I think specialisation in the medical / pharmaceutical field is basically necessary and also what inevitably had to happen (because of the aforementioned ever-increasing mountains of specialized knowledge). Where I see a distinct problem is that the different people any given patient sees very often tend not to sufficiently communicate with each other, ie sharing notes and info on that patient, etc.

Of course I am aware of the fact that science has progressed since then. However that still doesn't make it impossible to study a second discipline and thus gain more understanding. When I finished my finance bachelors and started working, I simultaneously studied systems science in my free time which led to some interesting synergistic work and project strategies that I executed based on my deepened understanding.
This is what I meant with my original comment. An interdisciplinary approach to education.

The current tunnel vision approach however, which we call "specialization", to the total exclusion of everything else is actually not conducive to a more holistic understanding. Science having progressed and being more complicated simply means that you have to put in more effort that's all. Any barrier you think exists is only imagined.

Example: a propagandist (crowd psychology) also being a physicist applies the thermodynamic principle of entropy to create confusion and thus indecisiveness within a social group. He successfully applied concepts and principles from two seemingly unrelated areas of knowledge, to create a novel and superior way in solving a problem and now understands both sciences from a perspective that nobody else so far does.
THAT is what I'm talking about!

 

[Burnt Offerings]

Doctors are human beings and like all human beings they’re flawed and vulnerable to human failings like greed, incompetence, arrogance etc. I don’t think that any reasonable person could come to the conclusion that there is “no corruption in the medical industry”…I’d say that overall my experiences with them have been pretty good though…I despise the way the healthcare system works in the USA but the doctors aren’t responsible for the reason it irritates me. I’ve had moments like I’m sure we all have where you just think “where’d you get your medical degree, off the back of a cereal box?” but I don’t know, I try to be understanding too

 

[Hexenstahl]

but the doctors aren’t responsible for the reason it irritates me

This kind of argumentation reminds me strongly of all those soldiers who tried to deflect their own responsibility and contribution to war crimes by saying the age old excuse "but we were only following orders".
I'm sorry but doctors most definitely DO have contributed to the way the system is by silent and cowardly compliance. The only innocent people I see here are the patients who always end up on the receiving end.

Excusing greed and corruption among doctors because "they are humans too" is the perfect get out of jail free card. I mean where do we draw the line? Can I found a bank holding company and rob an entire nation's pension fund? Will you excuse this morally despicable act too, because I happen to be human? This is the type of argumentation that someone uses when he doesn't want to change anything about himself because -> hey I'm just human so leave me and my faults alone.

This is exactly what Friedrich Nietzsche criticized about western culture when he was talking about slave morality. You have the mental attitude of a slave who excuses the abuse of his "master" in a stockholm fashion. It's the sign of a psychologically broken individual.

 

[DeathIndustrial88]

Based on that study, at least 250,000 Americans die each year due to some sort of medical error. But, depending on what is considered a medical mistake, that number could be as high as 440,000.

Up to 1,500,000 people suffer a nonfatal injury due to a medical error each year.

How Many Medical Malpractice Deaths Occur Per Year?

How many medical malpractice deaths occur each year in the United States? We take a look at some harrowing statistics here in our blog.

www.maloneylawgroup.com

That's alot of people effected by medical malpractice every year in the US.



Besides corruption, there's also incompetence. As long as a doctor is getting those kick backs & nice vacations, what do they care if their patients meds have given them tardive dyskinesia or sudden death? Whoopsie, oh well right? Doctor needed that new car anyway.


I'm sorry but with the kind of money doctors make, we shouldn't be giving them the "oh well they're only human" excuse whenever they endanger the lives of others. When I endanger anybody else, I'm committing a crime, but when some one ends up with long lasting side effects from a drug they were given, 9 times out of 10 absolutely no one is held responsible for it. And then patient becomes a perfect candidate for more drugs to treat the side effects caused by their shitty drugs in the first place!


Pretty hilarious that everyone's holding doctors to a lower standard than me even. lol These doctors went to school but "they're only human". And of course I can't know anything without "working in a lab"... Yet ironically these people who went to school to become doctors don't always know wtf they're talking about either. lol So Stupid.

 

[someguyontheinternet]

So why don't you go to medical school then

 

[Opi_Kid_Rock]

I'm not sure how knowingly they do this, or to what degree ignorance is involved.

It is an interesting phenomenon though. Imagine being a physician and prescribing medication without reading up on said medication beyond the promotional pamphlets or prescribing leaflet. Psychiatrists may be perhaps the worst offenders here. Part of this stems from the fact that psychiatry attracts the bottom of the barrel as far as physicians go, with these physicians having among the worst average USMLE exams (licensing) scores of any physician specialty. Not surprisingly they tend to lack intellectual curiosity and a desire to learn, and are among the most insecure about their knowledge (which makes them even more resistant to learn since it might mean their understanding of something is wrong).

Interesting you bring these points up regarding psychiatry. The false premise of serotonin and its relation to depression having been disproven and announced by the US National psychiatry board or what have you, while the practice of not believing in correlation does not equal causation continues and is inconsistent throughout demonstrates how un-scientific the field currently is.

 

[TheUltimateFixx]

But you probably make good money from this kind of corruption, so of course you'll defend it.
Must be good money if you can't see it from my perspective.

What the heck man? I agree with you on most things you post here, but you're WAY off the mark with this. The guy studied pharmacology, so now in your mind he's a member of some greedy money-making cabal only interested in screwing people over for money? Seriously what. the. fuck.

Yes money unfortunately rules everything in this world we live in. And nobody rational denies drug companies make a shit ton of it, nor denies they push some pretty useless medications on the public for the sake of money.

But if you wanna get rich in this field you either become the shareholder of one of said companies or a prestigious specialist in an area like neurosurgery or cardiac surgery. (which at any rate SAVES LIVES, that's why it's prestigious).

And no, you don't need a science degree to make a valid contribution, but what you're doing here is just denigrating the whole profession for no reason other than some personal ideology. Yes there are plenty of government-funded research institutes. This does NOT mean all the scientists are somehow beholden to the government in the research they publish.

Because there's this thing called peer review. Any CREDITABLE study has to stand up to peer review, and let me tell you those who are working in the scientific field will ABSOLUTELY tear one another down whenever anything looks like the data has been faked or skewed, or there was a bias in the whole premise, the sample was insufficient (ie not statistically relevant) or the results don't pan out. There's no imaginary united front trying to cover 'the government's' arse.

PS by far the majority of scientific frauds in history have been called out by other scientists, not laymen. That should tell you something.