Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
General
GeneralCardiologyVisionDentistryPharmacyLaboratoryNutritionAlternative
Diseases and Disorders
AIDSAlzheimer'sArthritisAsthmaCancerBreast CancerDiabetesEpilepsyGlaucomaHepatitisHerpesLupusProstate BPHProstate CancerProstatitisSinusitisTinnitus

Medical Forum / General / Alternative / August 2005

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

15 Ways the Auto Industry Would Change if it Operated Like Drug Companies

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
john - 29 Aug 2005 17:10 GMT
http://www.mercola.com/2005/aug/18/15_ways_the_auto_industry_would_change_if
_it_operated_like_drug_companies.htm

15 Ways the Auto Industry Would Change if it Operated Like Drug Companies

AutomobileBy Mike Adams, The Health Ranger

What would happen if you had to buy your car from a company that operated
in the same way as the pharmaceutical industries? Mike Adams, the Health
Ranger, came up with 15 unsettling changes that would occur.

Cost

   *

     Your car would cost $4.5 million, a 30,000 percent markup over cost.
   *

     The same car would be available in Canada or Mexico for less than
$5,000.

Dealing with Competition

   *

     Meanwhile, automakers would be lobbying Congress to outlaw bicycles
and airplanes, just as the drug companies try to do with herbs and
nutritional supplements.
   *

     All auto imports would be banned. If you drove a Toyota down from
Canada, you would be arrested.
   *

     Car dealers would be bribed with money, free vacations, free food,
and free cars by automobile sales representatives to push certain cars.

Safety

   *

     Cars with no seatbelts, airbags, crumple zones, or other safety
systems would be declared perfectly safe by the FDA, which would instead
focus on the dangers of bicycles.
   *

     Driver's ed programs would be cancelled nationwide, and people would
be encouraged to buy new cars rather than repair damaged ones or avoid
accidents in the first place.
   *

     Safety tests showing that cars were dangerous would be buried, and
scientists who produced such results would be prevented from ever
conducting car safety tests ever again.
   *

     After being sued by customers injured in the cars with no safety
systems, automakers would further lobby Congress to pass laws protecting
car companies against class-action lawsuits.
   *

     Any federally mandated warnings about car safety problems would be
printed in small type on a tiny label hidden under the driver's seat.
   *

     Driving certain cars would cause side effects like loss of sex drive
or full-body muscle pain.

Advertising

   *

     Car companies would heavily promote new models each year, which would
be no different from the ones they were selling 30 years ago.
   *

     Car companies would invent reasons for you to buy a dozen or more
cars.
   *

     Automobile advertising would be filled with pictures of happy,
healthy, energetic drivers, but the cars would break down constantly, fail
to perform as promised, and quickly stop working.
   *

     Cars would be sold to you with extra features like a sunroof, air
conditioning, or a navigational system, but when the car arrived none of
these features would be included, just as drug companies exaggerate the
"multiple health benefits" of their products.

News Target July 22, 2005

Dr. Mercola's Comment:

This article is spot on. If you enjoyed it half as much as I did, then
please forward this page to a friend or relative by using the blue "E-mail
to a Friend" link in the very top upper right section of this page (right
below the search box). You can also include a short note with something
specific for them as to why they might want to consider subscribing to the
newsletter to improve their health.

Unfortunately, this parody does not only apply to the pharmaceutical
industry. The obscene business practices of companies that sell dangerous
chemicals in the form of drugs, processed foods, and toxic products,
coupled with the industry-friendly laws of a bought-and-paid-for Congress,
have slowly evolved into a deadly system that would be clearly insane if
applied to any other aspect of life.

When it comes to protecting your health from deadly chemicals, neither the
government nor the industries that sell the dangerous products have your
best interests foremost in their minds. Here are a few more analogies
showing how deranged the system currently is:

If the movie industry were run like the food industry, any film critic who
wrote a negative review would be sued under the terms of "movie
disparagement laws" passed by a heavily lobbied Congress. The movie
producers might not win the case, but the critics would be bankrupted by
legal fees.

If restaurants were regulated like the chemical industry, then restaurant
owners would perform their own health inspections on a voluntary basis.
Only the very largest chain restaurants would even do that.

If the police operated like the EPA, they would only arrest people for five
very specific types of crime, like murder with a blunt instrument committed
on a Tuesday. They would ignore all of the others. Usually, they wouldn't
even bother to investigate.

If the school system were run like the FDA, students would test themselves
at home and then simply tell the teachers how they did. The school system
would depend on fees paid by the students' parents, so they would pass
nearly everyone. Of course, only wealthy families could afford the fees --
poorer students would be unable to get a high school diploma at all, and
would be barred from most jobs.

Your safety from dangerous chemicals is clearly largely in your own hands.
Play it safe and minimize your exposure to them:

   *

     Rather than becoming dependent on drugs, maintain your health with
proper nutrition and exercise.
   *

     Buy organic, prepare your own food as much as possible, and avoid
fast food at all costs.

Related Articles:

   Is Congress Taking Handouts From the Drug Companies?

   Researchers Prove Drug Company Marketing to You is Having Serious
Influence on Doctors

   10 Problems with Microsoft

   How Could Drug Companies be so Evil?
beckcham - 29 Aug 2005 22:59 GMT
Interesting stats.  Thanks.
Jeff - 30 Aug 2005 02:32 GMT
> http://www.mercola.com/2005/aug/18/15_ways_the_auto_industry_would_change_if
> _it_operated_like_drug_companies.htm
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
>
>      Your car would cost $4.5 million, a 30,000 percent markup over cost.

The cost of automobiles includes the development of new technologies, like
antilock brakes and airbags. Likewise, the price of drugs includes
development.

>    *
>
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
> and airplanes, just as the drug companies try to do with herbs and
> nutritional supplements.

Actually, automakers would be making bicycles and airplanes, just like bid
drug companies sell herbs and supplements.

>    *
>
>      All auto imports would be banned. If you drove a Toyota down from
> Canada, you would be arrested.

Actually, no one is arresting people importing drugs for their own use. And
it is now illegal to import a Toyota from outside the country, unless it
meets US requirements.

>    *
>
>      Car dealers would be bribed with money, free vacations, free food,
> and free cars by automobile sales representatives to push certain cars.

They already are.

> Safety
>
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> systems would be declared perfectly safe by the FDA, which would instead
> focus on the dangers of bicycles.

Actually, cars would have to meet strict safety requirements.

>    *
>
>      Driver's ed programs would be cancelled nationwide, and people would
> be encouraged to buy new cars rather than repair damaged ones or avoid
> accidents in the first place.

Actually, car dealers would be required to take continuing education.

>    *
>
>      Safety tests showing that cars were dangerous would be buried, and
> scientists who produced such results would be prevented from ever
> conducting car safety tests ever again.

You mean like Ford and the problems with the Explorer?

>    *
>
>      After being sued by customers injured in the cars with no safety
> systems, automakers would further lobby Congress to pass laws protecting
> car companies against class-action lawsuits.

Really? Didn't one big drug maker just lose a $250 million or so suit for
its COX2 inhibitor?

>    *
>
>      Any federally mandated warnings about car safety problems would be
> printed in small type on a tiny label hidden under the driver's seat.

Or in ads in newspapers.

>    *
>
>      Driving certain cars would cause side effects like loss of sex drive
> or full-body muscle pain.

That already happens. Ever see an old dude driving a Porshe?

> Advertising
>
>    *
>
>      Car companies would heavily promote new models each year, which would
> be no different from the ones they were selling 30 years ago.

You mean like conmed people (conjecture-based medicine aka alternative
medicine)?

>    *
>
>      Car companies would invent reasons for you to buy a dozen or more
> cars.

Just like con-med.

>    *
>
>      Automobile advertising would be filled with pictures of happy,
> healthy, energetic drivers, but the cars would break down constantly, fail
> to perform as promised, and quickly stop working.

Again, just like con-med.

>    *
>
>      Cars would be sold to you with extra features like a sunroof, air
> conditioning, or a navigational system, but when the car arrived none of
> these features would be included, just as drug companies exaggerate the
> "multiple health benefits" of their products.

Just like con-med.

Garbage (mercola's comments) deleted.

Jeff
Eric Bohlman - 30 Aug 2005 07:39 GMT
>> http://www.mercola.com/2005/aug/18/15_ways_the_auto_industry_would_cha
>> nge_if _it_operated_like_drug_companies.htm
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> like antilock brakes and airbags. Likewise, the price of drugs
> includes development.

What's even sillier is that the people who talk about "30,000 percent
markup" are comparing the retail price of a pill with the cost of the raw
materials used to make it.  But the raw materials don't work the way the
pill does (remember we're talking about the reactants in the synthesis of
the active compound, not the active compound itself), so people like that
aren't just omitting the cost of development, they're omitting the cost
of manufacturing!  A car appears to have a very high "markup" if you
compare its sale price to the cost of the steel it's built with.
Jeff - 30 Aug 2005 12:08 GMT
>>> http://www.mercola.com/2005/aug/18/15_ways_the_auto_industry_would_cha
>>> nge_if _it_operated_like_drug_companies.htm
[quoted text clipped - 16 lines]
> of manufacturing!  A car appears to have a very high "markup" if you
> compare its sale price to the cost of the steel it's built with.

Don't forget the low cost of sand used to make silicon-based chips!
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2008 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.