While theories about whether the healthcare system is designed to work on the symptoms than on the cure abound, a lot still need to be done to come to the right conclusion. In some instances, the efforts by pharmaceutical companies to get the cure for many ailments have raised questions.
However, crucifying the whole system may not be worth the risk as there are several cures that have been seen to work. The two paradigms of what the healthcare system should have and what is available have in some instances brought a lot of discussions.
It may be to look at the number of cases where healthcare industry players have been seen to fail. Let’s look at some of the theories; Chronic ailment cure, the basis for suspicion Is there an effort to eliminate cases of chronic illnesses?
However, looking closely, it is apparent that while there is a lot of research on these diseases, the financial gains accrued by the pharmaceuticals raises eyebrows. One case is the cure for diabetes. Diabetes in itself regarded as one of the most lucrative chronic diseases to these pharmaceuticals remains prevalent. While the companies are rumored to make inroads in some of the curative areas, the sale of other injection based medicines like insulin and glucose raises income to these enterprises.
According to the institute of medicine, the quality system regarding cure has been below par, to say the least. When they looked at the American healthcare system, they concluded that; “The acute care medical model based on an episodic is the largest contributor to America’s health care system that cannot optimally provide the services needed by people with chronic conditions” (Priester, 2005).
In fact, the over-reliance on individuals with these chronic diseases has exposed the system to forces of the economy. For instance, the concerns by Kelly Close, the president of the diabetes consulting firm; “It is likely that the pharmaceutical companies may be busy hiding the cure for profit basis.” Supports part of the curiosity (Blass, 2012) The catch In as much as we may crucify the companies, the research that the companies engage in to get a cure for the various diseases overrules the theory on the economics.
Medicine is a social aspect and in some instances, having a cure and sleeping on it may not be to the benefit of the companies. The ever-changing nature of most of the chronic ailments is the greatest impediment to the cure of diseases and not the research. Most of the healthcare experts would rather be happy to unravel the treatment and help save some of their close friends and families.
The shocking reality that there are some diseases which are in existence even with the presence of treatment and the underlying inability of some health care pharmaceutical companies to control who does what research supports the belief that there is no conspiracy to sit on any cure. The argument backed by Sanofi, a healthcare company as well as a research associate that believes that the biggest drivers, in this case, is the need for them to- “improve patients’ lives through more targeted therapies.
If there is a cure, even remote, this is what we aim for.” says Marc Bonnefoi-Head of the company (Blass, 2012). Conclusion Answering the question of whether the health sector bears the responsibility for only treating symptoms when they have the cure because of the underlying factors of motive on the part of many of the pharmaceuticals may be premature.
While their motive could be right, the indictment on them as profit based entities leaves a lot of holes. Cost and time play a bigger role in the process of companies releasing a given cure in the market. It is clear that money drives the whole agenda and medicine may be available yet someone keeps it within the pipeline!
Blass, A. (2012). Is There a Conspiracy Preventing a Diabetes Cure? healthline .
Priester, R. (2005). How the Current System Fails People. The Society of Actuaries.