Have you ever changed someone's mind about a controversial issue?

[Haicoway]

I’m no family guy. Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde might be more apt to describe my split personality.

But as Henry I have done a remarkable job. The girl could pass for pedigree anywhere, and her story eclipses Eliza’s. A New York City Black ghetto is a lot grittier than a Cockney working-class neighborhood.

Around me, she still discharges “Me and my friends” as a subject. I’ll give her that look and she’ll superciliously bat her eyes and enunciate, “My friends and *I*.”

[Steve3007]

I’m no family guy.

I presume you googled it and saw that in the summary.

Neither is the character of Glenn Quagmire.

[Haicoway]

I brought up Jekyll and Hyde freshly. I googled Quagmire because I couldn't remember ever hearing or seeing anything about him, and found a cartoon character of an oversexed middle-class family looking guy from next door. I'm not he. I call myself a lecher because I date girls young enough to be my granddaughter, which might be offensive to some people. But I'm not oversexed at all. And several people who know the relationship between my ghetto girl and me have made the parallel with "My Fair Lady."

[LuckyR]

Yes, without thinking much, I was focusing on people holding emotional matters of opinion, such as that Trump is wrong for the Presidency. I am currently mentoring a young African American girl who was raised in a ghetto with no exposure to café society, but she graduated from college with the highest honors. She asked me if I would teach her genteel manners to accompany her academic achievements toward a professional career. I was happy to because she is extraordinarily pretty and I’m a lecher of sorts.

She told me at dinner a couple of evenings ago that she believed that pharmaceutical companies had drugs to cure cancer but were keeping them under wraps so they could continue to sell less effective drugs for massive profit.

I told her that it wasn’t sophisticated to believe untrue conspiracy theories, and especially to express them. So I arranged a dinner with a PhD pharmacologist who has spent his entire career as an executive in pharmaceutical research to explain the reality to the girl with authority. And her mind shall be changed.

Sounds like you predict she knows enough to know she doesn't know everything.

[Haicoway]

Yes, I don’t understand why she would believe such a thing. I have read that people who feel powerless tend to believe conspiracies so that they feel they are in more control, in that nobody’s going to put anything over on them. But my ward, although she comes from a ghetto, feels like Wonder Woman, because of her academic acumen and very good looks. She knows she’s going to be a success, and she is constantly being complimented.

We’re having that dinner with the pharmaceutical executive tonight, and I am very interested to see if she can totally get off of it.

[LuckyR]

Yes, I don’t understand why she would believe such a thing. I have read that people who feel powerless tend to believe conspiracies so that they feel they are in more control, in that nobody’s going to put anything over on them. But my ward, although she comes from a ghetto, feels like Wonder Woman, because of her academic acumen and very good looks. She knows she’s going to be a success, and she is constantly being complimented.

We’re having that dinner with the pharmaceutical executive tonight, and I am very interested to see if she can totally get off of it.

Post back with your findings. I would parse her relative strengths and weaknesses thusly: computationally intelligent, street smart at least competent (based on her success within her initial environment) and wisdom challenged, based on your concerns per the odd theories.

[Haicoway]

Lucky, you are more perceptive about the girl than I am, and you’re not with her. The Pharmaceutical Exec (his wife joined the dinner, a registered nurse, familiar with clinical research) couldn’t be more qualified to render the correct state of affairs on the subject. He owned one and was CEO of another clinical contract research company. He had literally worked with hundreds of pharmaceutical companies, their research, and their principals.

Something that big could never be kept under wraps, because of all the different kinds of institutions working on any clinical study. And if any company did come up with “the cure,” it would be a huge money making blockbuster. And just about every family sees cancer, so if there was a cure, the pharma people would need it, too. And, again, you couldn’t get hundreds of sociopath researchers together to keep it quiet. The Doctor added that employees migrate from one company to another more than in many industries, and there are hundreds of biopharmaceutical young companies working on cancer research, who are watching for any helpful information.

Yet, I think the girl still believes in the conspiracy theory. I am going to go out on a marginalizing, non-PC limb and say I think that type of blinder is more prevalent with Black people, even the smartest among them, because they were in fact subjected to horrible clinical trial abuse and real conspiracies. It’s similar to third-generation family members of those who suffered in the Holocaust, which my other girl is. She recognizes that the Jewish stereotype is justified in that she, like many other Jewish people she knows, relentlessly saves money and is concerned with money, because in her blood she never knows when she will have to flee oppressors.

[LuckyR]

Lucky, you are more perceptive about the girl than I am, and you’re not with her. The Pharmaceutical Exec (his wife joined the dinner, a registered nurse, familiar with clinical research) couldn’t be more qualified to render the correct state of affairs on the subject. He owned one and was CEO of another clinical contract research company. He had literally worked with hundreds of pharmaceutical companies, their research, and their principals.

Something that big could never be kept under wraps, because of all the different kinds of institutions working on any clinical study. And if any company did come up with “the cure,” it would be a huge money making blockbuster. And just about every family sees cancer, so if there was a cure, the pharma people would need it, too. And, again, you couldn’t get hundreds of sociopath researchers together to keep it quiet. The Doctor added that employees migrate from one company to another more than in many industries, and there are hundreds of biopharmaceutical young companies working on cancer research, who are watching for any helpful information.

Yet, I think the girl still believes in the conspiracy theory. I am going to go out on a marginalizing, non-PC limb and say I think that type of blinder is more prevalent with Black people, even the smartest among them, because they were in fact subjected to horrible clinical trial abuse and real conspiracies. It’s similar to third-generation family members of those who suffered in the Holocaust, which my other girl is. She recognizes that the Jewish stereotype is justified in that she, like many other Jewish people she knows, relentlessly saves money and is concerned with money, because in her blood she never knows when she will have to flee oppressors.

Well, stereotypes are based on actual observations (that is: data points), their problem is not inaccuracy, per se', but the misuse of group observations to label individuals.

[Haicoway]

I totally agree that a stereotype should not be applied to anyone in advance of observing that the person might fit the stereotype, and even then the behavior might be caused by some factor not connected with the person being a member of the stereotyped group that includes the observed behavior. So a stereotype should not be applied to any individual, except under situations such as the Jewish person telling me that her behavior was linked to the Holocaust.

So I am guilty, because I don't know where the girl got the propensity to abandon reason in the specific area of pharma. It might have nothing to do with her Black ghetto upbringing.

[LuckyR]

I totally agree that a stereotype should not be applied to anyone in advance of observing that the person might fit the stereotype, and even then the behavior might be caused by some factor not connected with the person being a member of the stereotyped group that includes the observed behavior. So a stereotype should not be applied to any individual, except under situations such as the Jewish person telling me that her behavior was linked to the Holocaust.

So I am guilty, because I don't know where the girl got the propensity to abandon reason in the specific area of pharma. It might have nothing to do with her Black ghetto upbringing.

I agree with you that her upbringing was not the source, though IMO it was a major (if not the major) contributor to the mindset that would entertain such an otherwise illogical proposition. Especially in an individual who otherwise might be more logical than average.

[Felix]

Haicoway: Yes, I don’t understand why she would believe such a thing.

Um, have you asked her? Just to play devil's advocate about that conspiracy theory....

Drug companies are in business to (1) make money, and (2) find cures for diseases, usually in that order. So if the CEO of a publicly traded stock drug company had the choice between developing and marketing a cancer fighting drug that was (a) 90% effective but had little or no profit potential (difficult to patent, very expensive to produce, etc.), or (b) 60% effective but has a fantastic profit potential; which one do you think they would choose?

I mean, the American Cancer Society has been in business for over 100 years, and they have an annual income over over $800 million dollars a year, how anxious do you think they are to put their cash cow out to pasture?

[LuckyR]

Haicoway: Yes, I don’t understand why she would believe such a thing.

Um, have you asked her? Just to play devil's advocate about that conspiracy theory....

Drug companies are in business to (1) make money, and (2) find cures for diseases, usually in that order. So if the CEO of a publicly traded stock drug company had the choice between developing and marketing a cancer fighting drug that was (a) 90% effective but had little or no profit potential (difficult to patent, very expensive to produce, etc.), or (b) 60% effective but has a fantastic profit potential; which one do you think they would choose?

I mean, the American Cancer Society has been in business for over 100 years, and they have an annual income over over $800 million dollars a year, how anxious do you think they are to put their cash cow out to pasture?

You don't think a Pharmaceutical company couldn't find a way to charge a lot of money for a "breakthrough" drug? Don't you think it is inherently more difficult to charge a lot of money for a product that doesn't work that great?

Part of the misunderstanding is the idea that "cancer" is a single problem with a single cure. If breast cancer was cured tomorrow, there'd be plenty of work left to do in the cancer field.

[Felix]

Well, breakthroughs can require a large investment in research with no guarantee of a decent return, which is why we rarely see them. And if the drug is based on a natural compound that can't be synthesized and/or patented, then you can't insure that your investment will pay off. For example, a patent on synthetic THC has little value because it does not have some of the important medicinal properties of the natural compound from the marijuana plant.

LuckyR: Don't you think it is inherently more difficult to charge a lot of money for a product that doesn't work that great?

It doesn't have to work great, just better than your competitors products. All I'm saying is that it's easy to see how focusing on financial rewards can corrupt the practice of medicine, and why someone might be cynical about the motives of drug companies. Conspiracy theories always start with cynicism - combined with ignorance.

[Haicoway]

I didn’t mention that I worked in the drug development industry myself for fifteen years. I managed and monitored clinical trials. In order to prove a drug works, it has to be tested in enough subjects with the type of cancer targeted to establish statistical significance. The testing is done by independent physicians called investigators, in hospitals or their offices, when they affiliate with a trial. They get paid a relatively small fee per patient to test the drug on them. FDA regulations require that the investigators have no stake in the profits of any drug with which they are involved, so that their findings can be trusted.

So when a drug works, the independent doctor; his or her coordinator, who does all the administrative work and testing documentation connected with the process; the patient; and the patient’s family know. These people would have no reason to cover up the important and exciting development.

It is only people who do not understand how drug development operates that could think a proven cure for any type of cancer could or would be kept secret.

[Felix]

FDA regulations require that the investigators have no stake in the profits of any drug with which they are involved, so that their findings can be trusted

.

However, the company that financed the research often does, the FDA approval process can be and has been compromised:
https://bit.ly/2pWaUxN