So can i ask you, how would independent studies get the required funding and more importantly get the required materials for an experimental drug/injection? Your talking about millions of dollars and thousands/tens of thousands of doses.
This is not academia that is manufacturing these products and pharma is all interconnected. At the same time the FDA and CDC have shown their true colors.
Well, therein lies the rub, no? Science has been funded by government and private industries since basically forever.
It's only really become a problem when the government and private industry became intertwined in such a way that they realized they could profit off of each other's corruption.
Additionally, we've never really been at such a point before where elections didn't matter and world governments were so infiltrated that there was no one to stand against the narratives.
This is also why the World Health Organization is probably the biggest crime syndicate on its face; they have way more sway than they should, and affect far more countries than they should, and hold a lot of science hostage.
That's why I propose a cleansing of governments (obviously) but in the future providing funding only if research is progressing and iterative, with frequent auditing by different people.
E.g. in the smaller scale singular country scale, one year you might have an auditing team from California, and another year an auditing team from Texas, and then another an auditing team from Florida, New York, so on to ensure that research being done at these labs are meaningful and moving forward, and also to ensure that the results are as stated -- whether negative or positive.
So, in this idealistic methodology, science wouldn't follow a narrative; science would follow science.
If we had two labs who said that these vaccines were safe for example, we might have three or four labs who say they aren't. Both provide their data, showing that funding has been used in good faith to progress their research and trials, but rather than suppressing what the narrative wants suppressed (negative research that shows that the vaccines aren't safe) and threatening to revoke their funding if the research doesn't change, both sets of research retain their funding until a conclusion is reached or the program is retooled to different research because it can't be demonstrated as safe.
Additionally, as a condition of public funding, I would restrict direct communication between different labs' scientists to limit collusion and maintain the integrity of different labs.
Now on the private sector front, Big Pharma isn't the only game in the business. It's just an oligopoly supported by governments. We, as the people who should make up these governments, have to put our foot down to prevent that. No getting in bed with large pharmaceutical companies; if you're a Pfizer, or a Moderna, or a J&J, etc. then you can fund your own research and be audited for several years of trials before you can make it to market.
Medicine is so integral to society and so important for people who need it that trust and corruption cannot be afforded to this industry.
For smaller companies that require funding for generic or new medicines, funding should absolutely be strictly and carefully applied based on well documented data reviewed by different teams of people.
Additionally, another change we need to see and we need to see stick is absolutely no ownership of stocks by any sitting Congressperson or Senator or any of their family. Immediate sale of all stocks upon winning your election. Additionally, your bank income should be public record for as long as you are in office.
All of these are pretty idealist in nature, but at this point I believe in absolutely no quarter, mercy or trust; medicine is too important, and these "representatives" in name only need to be forced to adhere to the will of their constituents, instead of what they're bribed to do, and should not be able to use their position to benefit themselves in any way. The only reason they're paid is so that they can do their job without having to make ends meet.
So can i ask you, how would independent studies get the required funding and more importantly get the required materials for an experimental drug/injection? Your talking about millions of dollars and thousands/tens of thousands of doses.
This is not academia that is manufacturing these products and pharma is all interconnected. At the same time the FDA and CDC have shown their true colors.
Well, therein lies the rub, no? Science has been funded by government and private industries since basically forever.
It's only really become a problem when the government and private industry became intertwined in such a way that they realized they could profit off of each other's corruption.
Additionally, we've never really been at such a point before where elections didn't matter and world governments were so infiltrated that there was no one to stand against the narratives.
This is also why the World Health Organization is probably the biggest crime syndicate on its face; they have way more sway than they should, and affect far more countries than they should, and hold a lot of science hostage.
That's why I propose a cleansing of governments (obviously) but in the future providing funding only if research is progressing and iterative, with frequent auditing by different people.
E.g. in the smaller scale singular country scale, one year you might have an auditing team from California, and another year an auditing team from Texas, and then another an auditing team from Florida, New York, so on to ensure that research being done at these labs are meaningful and moving forward, and also to ensure that the results are as stated -- whether negative or positive.
So, in this idealistic methodology, science wouldn't follow a narrative; science would follow science.
If we had two labs who said that these vaccines were safe for example, we might have three or four labs who say they aren't. Both provide their data, showing that funding has been used in good faith to progress their research and trials, but rather than suppressing what the narrative wants suppressed (negative research that shows that the vaccines aren't safe) and threatening to revoke their funding if the research doesn't change, both sets of research retain their funding until a conclusion is reached or the program is retooled to different research because it can't be demonstrated as safe.
Additionally, as a condition of public funding, I would restrict direct communication between different labs' scientists to limit collusion and maintain the integrity of different labs.
Now on the private sector front, Big Pharma isn't the only game in the business. It's just an oligopoly supported by governments. We, as the people who should make up these governments, have to put our foot down to prevent that. No getting in bed with large pharmaceutical companies; if you're a Pfizer, or a Moderna, or a J&J, etc. then you can fund your own research and be audited for several years of trials before you can make it to market.
Medicine is so integral to society and so important for people who need it that trust and corruption cannot be afforded to this industry.
For smaller companies that require funding for generic or new medicines, funding should absolutely be strictly and carefully applied based on well documented data reviewed by different teams of people.
Additionally, another change we need to see and we need to see stick is absolutely no ownership of stocks by any sitting Congressperson or Senator or any of their family. Immediate sale of all stocks upon winning your election. Additionally, your bank income should be public record for as long as you are in office.
All of these are pretty idealist in nature, but at this point I believe in absolutely no quarter, mercy or trust; medicine is too important, and these "representatives" in name only need to be forced to adhere to the will of their constituents, instead of what they're bribed to do, and should not be able to use their position to benefit themselves in any way. The only reason they're paid is so that they can do their job without having to make ends meet.