Pharmaceutical Research Funding Reform Act (PATA-Subsection 05)

Health
,
1

Pharmaceutical Research Funding Reform Act (PATA-Subsection 05)

[*Draft Work in Progress]

Executive Summary

The PATA-Subsection 05 proposes to redirect a portion of pharmaceutical profits towards public research funds, aiming to democratize research, drive innovation for public health, and reduce the industry’s influence over research agendas. It seeks to shift the paradigm of pharmaceutical research and funding by focusing on low-cost, safe therapeutics, preventive healthcare, and rectifying the harms caused by unethical practices in the industry, supporting the development of treatments for those injured by previously coerced medical interventions.

Purpose

To foster a healthcare system where research prioritizes accessible, low-cost treatments and preventive care, while also addressing the fallout from industry practices that have not served public health interests, by:

  • Promoting research into vitamins, natural compounds, and other low-cost therapeutics.
  • Redirecting profits from pharmaceutical companies, particularly those linked to unethical practices, to fund public health research.
  • Supporting research and development for treatments aimed at healing individuals harmed by experimental or improperly approved drugs.
  • Combatting journal capture or bias due to advertising dependencies.

Historical Context

  • Profit vs. Public Health: The pharmaceutical industry’s focus has often been on high-profit drugs, sidelining exploration of less lucrative but potentially more beneficial treatments like ivermectin1.

  • Industry Influence: The narrative around certain treatments has been shaped by industry interests, leading to the suppression or discrediting of alternative research2.

  • Public Funding Models: Historical public health initiatives demonstrate how funding can be directed towards solutions that benefit the broader public rather than just the market3.

Problems

  • Organ Damage from Pharmaceuticals: Drugs like remdesivir have been linked to significant organ damage, while alternatives like ivermectin, when supported by valid research, offer safer options4.
  • Industry Influence on Research: The pharmaceutical industry has influenced scientific discourse, publications, and public perception, often at the expense of public health truth5.
  • Suppression of Dissenting Voices: Researchers and clinicians advocating for alternative treatments or highlighting industry misconduct have faced censorship, retractions, or professional repercussions6.

Key Components

  • Mechanism for Profit Redirection:

    • Penalty-Based Contributions: Companies found engaging in practices contrary to public health interests would contribute a portion of their profits or face penalties to a public health recovery fund.
    • Focus on Preventive and Low-Cost Care: Encourage research into affordable, safe alternatives that prevent disease, free from corporate profit motives. See Medical Modalities - Allopathic vs. Holistic

  • Oversight of Fund Allocation:

    • Independent Body: An independent entity would manage these funds, ensuring they’re used for research into low-cost therapeutics, preventive health strategies, and reparative treatments for drug injuries, without industry influence.
    • Public and Scientific Input: Broad, transparent stakeholder engagement to prioritize research that serves public health, countering industry-driven narratives.

Key Observations

  • Observation-01: The suppression of research into low-cost treatments like ivermectin due to industry influence illustrates the need for funding reform7.
  • Observation-02: The adverse effects of certain pharmaceuticals versus the potential benefits of alternatives underscore the necessity to realign research priorities8.
  • Observation-03: The industry’s control over information has led to a loss of public trust, necessitating policies to restore scientific integrity and freedom of expression9.

Legal Framework

  • Protection Against Undue Influence: Implement safeguards against the suppression or discrediting of research by ensuring transparency in funding, protecting researchers, and countering industry-driven narratives.
  • Accountability: Establish mechanisms to hold entities accountable for practices that obscure scientific truth or harm public health, including legal pathways for those affected by such practices.
  • Regulatory Independence: Strengthen policies to ensure regulatory bodies operate independently from industry influence, including extended cooling-off periods and funding reforms.10

Public Engagement and Media Integrity

  • Promoting Media Literacy: Support education and legislation to enhance public understanding of science, reducing susceptibility to biased narratives.
  • Support for Independent Journalism: Policies to encourage and protect reporting that challenges industry narratives when they contravene public health interests.

Appendix

Public Input

Your input is invaluable:

  • How can we ensure research prioritizes public health over corporate profit?
  • What measures should protect scientific discourse from industry influence?
  • Share your thoughts, experiences, or additional observations here.

Resources

Footnotes

[1]: Pharmaceutical Profits and Innovation - Focuses on how profit motives can influence drug development.

[2]: The Influence of Pharmaceutical Companies on Research - Discusses industry influence on medical research.

[3]: Public Funding for Health Research: An Analysis of Funding Mechanisms - Health Research Policy and Systems

[4]: Remdesivir – a death protocol By Craig Paardekooper - Eudra-vigilance data for all medicines, substances, products and vaccines between 2017 and 2024.
Analysis of Drug Safety Surveillance - Discusses the safety surveillance of drug development.

[5]: Industry Influence on Scientific Research - Article on how industry can skew research outcomes.

[6]: Censorship and Retractions in Science - Examines the impact of censorship on scientific discourse.

[7]: The Controversy Over Ivermectin - Lawsuit discussing the suppression of alternative treatment Ivermectin, by the FDA.

[8]: Safety Concerns with Remdesivir - Focuses on favoring remdesivir over safer alternatives despite study on marginal efficacy and harm signal.

[9]: Public Trust in Science - Pew Research on mistrust in institutions including government, media, and science, highlighting issues with industry influence. | Big Pharma is Hijacking the Information Doctors Need Most - Time Magazine

[10]: Legal Frameworks for Emergency Use Authorization - Third Party Review Program and Third Party Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) Review; Draft Guidance for Industry, Food and Drug Administration Staff, and Third Party Review Organizations; Availability, providing legal context.]

1 Like