Three more companies Catholics should boycott

[ribozyme]

In this thread, I will not promote a political agenda such as “socialism” or “egalitarianism” or European price caps, nor will I shake my fist at “big pharma.” I have to congratulate myself for not repining against the profits of drug companies in another thread with the exception of AstraZeneca’s profits for a specific enantiomer (esomaprazole) of a proton pump inhibitor. But one can obviously see through my socialist agenda in that thread given that I have used the * international non-proprietary names * for substances instead of their commercial names (eg. erlotinib, imatinib, bevacizumab; respectively Tarceva, Gleevac, Avastin) as I do not respect private property. (Of course, I was joking during my last sentence and I do think patents are necessary for innovation, but I’ll retain my habit of using the non-proprietary names.)

However, the focus of this thread is to bring awareness to a polemical irony about capitalism and Catholic belief. I remember a similar thread that advocates boycotts to Planned Parenthood. Should the capitalistic drug companies be endowed with the right to profit of their labor? If capitalistic drug companies want to maximize their profits, should they have the right to do so? However, what if that right involves using human embryonic stem cells and requires the destruction of an embryo?

“GlaxoSmithKline, AstraZeneca and Roche have each paid 100,000 pounds ($200,000) to help fund the first year’s work, while the British government is contributing 750,000 pounds.
…
Stem cells are the body’s master cell, acting as a source for the body’s cells and tissues. Embryonic stem cells are the most malleable, but their use in research is opposed by some people because it involves destruction of a human embryo.
Britain, however, has encouraged such research and science minister Ian Pearson said the new collaboration was an example of the government’s commitment to the field.

By working across academic and industrial laboratories, the project aims to develop effective ways of using human embryonic stem cells to screen for potentially dangerous side effects of new drugs before they go into clinical trials.”

reuters.com/article/healthNews/idUSL0233214720071002?feedType=RSS&feedName=healthNews&pageNumber=1&virtualBrandChannel=0

AstraZeneca, Roche, and GlaxoSmithKline should be added to the list of companies that have committed “mortal sin” by endorsing embryonic stem cell research.

Certain stem cell advances may allow scientists to accomplish this with using embryonic stem cells, but my main point is that these drug companies were willing to trespass on the sanctity of human life (defined in the Catholic sense) in order to maximize profits.

As a utilitarian, I have no reason to have any moral qualms about this. Unfortunately, after preclinical development, it is akin to a Hail Mary pass for a drug to make it to the market as a compound need to go through a gauntlet of Phase I, II, and III clinical trials to make it to the clinic. As a result of extensive clinical testing, only 10% of these compounds make it out of the pipeline. I suppose using embryos to improve the success rates would be desirable and cost effective as it would prune out some “failure” molecules. Also, this can help the companies reap the benefits of capitalism by creating more blockbusters and further enriching themselves. Greed is good, right?

Since embryos do not have interests nor can they suffer, I regard the failure of bringing a therapeutic drug to market a larger catastrophe than using embryos for clinical or research purposes.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a0/Torcetrapib.png/200px-Torcetrapib.png

Now that is something synonymous with failure; an $800 million dollar failure, catastrophe, debacle, fiasco!

Shouldn’t the thought of taking torcetrapib strike terror in dyslipidemic Catholics? The torcetrapib + atorvastatin arm of a 15k patient Phase III trial experienced a higher mortality rate than the placebo + atorvastatin arm [content.nejm.org/cgi/content/abstract/357/21/2109]](http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/abstract/357/21/2109]). In my opinion, this is one reason (and rofecoxib [the “V” word synonymous with “lawsuit” cough vioxx cough]) why expensive clinical trials should be conducted and this probably justifies some high drug prices. If using stem cells can deter such a tragedy and wasteful use of $800 million dollars, I suppose the use of embryonic stem cells can be justified.

 

[goofyjim]

And what if someone needs medication produced by one of these companies? Should they die without it just to show the support against abortion?

 

[deb1]

And what if someone needs medication produced by one of these companies? Should they die without it just to show the support against abortion?

You are going to die. That is a fact that none of us can get avoid. I would much rather my life end then have it prolonged by using embryonic stem cells. By the way, they are doing research into different types of stem cells that show promising results. So, this might eventually be a decision that we won’t be forced to make anyway.

 

[goofyjim]

You are going to die. That is a fact that none of us can get avoid. I would much rather my life end then have it prolonged by using embryonic stem cells. By the way, they are doing research into different types of stem cells that show promising results. So, this might eventually be a decision that we won’t be forced to make anyway.

I just grow increasingly uncomfortable with being told we should boycott certain companies as though it is a mortal sin if we don’t. I may need certain medication regardless of how they go about their research. When I shop at stores I am on a budget and cannot stop buying from a low price store simply because it supports something I disagree with.

 

[ribozyme]

I just grow increasingly uncomfortable with being told we should boycott certain companies as though it is a mortal sin if we don’t. I may need certain medication regardless of how they go about their research. When I shop at stores I am on a budget and cannot stop buying from a low price store simply because it supports something I disagree with.

Exactly my point, it shows that some Catholic values will clash with the staunch economic conservativism that is prevalent in this forum.

By the way, AstraZeneca, Roche, and GlaxoSmithKline are smart enough not to publically endorse abortion. They were considering using embryonic stem cells to further their R&D programs.

From another source:

Three companies have set up a consortium with the government to develop stem cells for safety testing of new drugs through a public-private partnership. The launch of Stem Cells for Safer Medicines, or SC4SM, is significant because “big pharma” has been reluctant to engage in embryonic stem cell research.

Companies fear the reaction in markets such as the US, where the use of human embryos is controversial, and they have left the field to universities and biotechnology businesses.
GlaxoSmithKline, AstraZeneca and Roche are inaugurating SC4SM in collaboration with several government departments.
More companies are expected to join, according to Philip Wright, science director at the Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry, who will also serve as chief executive of SC4SM.
SC4SM is the international industry’s first public-private partnership on human embryonic stem cells, following a recommendation by Sir John Pattison’s 2005 report on the future of stem cell research in Britain.
Dr Wright said: “It has taken a long time to set up because of the sensitivities. We have an ethical framework that says we should only use existing embryonic stem cell lines [in the UK stem cell bank] and next year we will have an independent ethics advisory board to provide further advice.”
The £1m first phase of a five-year, £10m programme will focus on producing liver cells. Ian Cotgreave, head of molecular toxicity for AstraZeneca, said: “The liver is a key organ for toxicity. It is the dustbin of the body, which neutralises and destroys drugs and toxins.”
Unexpected liver toxicity is the biggest single reason why medicines fail during trials. AstraZeneca’s Exanta, a blood-thinning drug, was a recent casualty.
Animal tests had given no clue to this problem, said Prof Cotgreave. “The predictability for liver toxicity from pre-clinical regulatory testing is almost as good as tossing a coin.”
SC4SM plans to fund five projects over the next year, aimed at converting human embryonic stem cells into hepatocytes (liver cells). These should be a more reliable guide to a new drug’s effect on the human liver.

ft.com/cms/s/0/22f48dd2-7111-11dc-98fc-0000779fd2ac.html

Those capitalistic companies seem to be more concerned with profits instead of the alleged sanctity of human embryos.

 

[iamscifimike]

I just grow increasingly uncomfortable with being told we should boycott certain companies as though it is a mortal sin if we don’t. I may need certain medication regardless of how they go about their research. When I shop at stores I am on a budget and cannot stop buying from a low price store simply because it supports something I disagree with.

What other things do you grow increasingly uncomfortable with when it comes to being told what to do?

Ultimately you do what you feel is best. This forum enables a community to provide information so we can make valid decisions as to what is best.

 

[goofyjim]

What other things do you grow increasingly uncomfortable with when it comes to being told what to do?

Ultimately you do what you feel is best. This forum enables a community to provide information so we can make valid decisions as to what is best.

How far do we take the extremism? Do we boycott companies that hire open homosexuals, even though they also employ married people? If all the pharmaceuticals start using the methods described here, do we suddenly say it is a mortal sin to take any medication and revert back to the days of ancient medicine instead of saving lives? The question of mortal sin should become to what degree we support something wrong. I don’t believe anyone who shops at Radioshack, Starbucks, or who takes medicine from these companies in this thread are directly or even indirectly supporting these things.

 

[ribozyme]

Looks like I wouldn’t be invited to any spelling bees this year:

Esomeprazole… not esomaprazole.

 

[ribozyme]

How far do we take the extremism? Do we boycott companies that hire open homosexuals, even though they also employ married people? If all the pharmaceuticals start using the methods described here, do we suddenly say it is a mortal sin to take any medication and revert back to the days of ancient medicine instead of saving lives? The question of mortal sin should become to what degree we support something wrong. I don’t believe anyone who shops at Radioshack, Starbucks, or who takes medicine from these companies in this thread are directly or even indirectly supporting these things.

But let’s not be a utilitarian and say the ends (therapies that ameliorate human suffering) justify the means (destruction of embryos). I thought that was the ethical approach for reviled figures such as Peter Singer, Jonathan Glover, and James Hughes as they are all utilitarians.

 

[whatevergirl]

I just grow increasingly uncomfortable with being told we should boycott certain companies as though it is a mortal sin if we don’t. I may need certain medication regardless of how they go about their research. When I shop at stores I am on a budget and cannot stop buying from a low price store simply because it supports something I disagree with.

It’s not a mortal sin to shop at a store, that for example, sells birth control. If one is buying it for himself/herself, for the sole purpose to prevent birth, that is another story. And again–not all bad sins are mortal sins. For a sin to be mortal, three things must be present…but I hesitate to go off on a tangent about what makes up a mortal sin.

That being said…there is no proof that embryonic stem cell research has saved anyone’s life…did you know that? I didn’t know that, and actually adult stem cells can save lives…and there is proof of that. So, although the media would have us believe that embryonic stem cells will save lives, and are a necessary thing…it is a bunch of lies, actually. Or perhaps just another contorted agenda by PP.

 

[kentuckyliz]

I occasionally use a drug synthesized from the stem cells of the ovaries of the Chinese hamster. Hopefully this doesn’t compromise my alleged moral purity. The animal rights wackos might get mad about that though.

 

[Mary_ann_R]

It’s not a mortal sin to shop at a store, that for example, sells birth control. If one is buying it for himself/herself, for the sole purpose to prevent birth, that is another story. And again–not all bad sins are mortal sins. For a sin to be mortal, three things must be present…but I hesitate to go off on a tangent about what makes up a mortal sin.

That being said…there is no proof that embryonic stem cell research has saved anyone’s life…did you know that? I didn’t know that, and actually adult stem cells can save lives…and there is proof of that. So, although the media would have us believe that embryonic stem cells will save lives, and are a necessary thing…it is a bunch of lies, actually. Or perhaps just another contorted agenda by PP.

Hi Whatevergirl,

I’m glad that you wrote this. I found this very interesting news.

From the PA Pro-Life Federation about the cures and/or successful human therapies for adult stem cell research treatments. There are 72.

26 - Cancers
15 - Auto-immune diseases
2 - Cardiovascular
1 - Ocular
3 - Immunodeficiencies
3 - Neural Degenerative diseases/injuries
10 - Anemias/Blood conditions
4 - Wounds/injuries
5 - Other metabolic disorders
2 - Liver disease
1 - Bladder disease

On the other hand, there are no known cures and/or successful human therapies for embryonic cells.

This information was provided to them by the Coalitions of Americans for Research Ethics.

 

[goofyjim]

It’s not a mortal sin to shop at a store, that for example, sells birth control. If one is buying it for himself/herself, for the sole purpose to prevent birth, that is another story. And again–not all bad sins are mortal sins. For a sin to be mortal, three things must be present…but I hesitate to go off on a tangent about what makes up a mortal sin.

That being said…there is no proof that embryonic stem cell research has saved anyone’s life…did you know that? I didn’t know that, and actually adult stem cells can save lives…and there is proof of that. So, although the media would have us believe that embryonic stem cells will save lives, and are a necessary thing…it is a bunch of lies, actually. Or perhaps just another contorted agenda by PP.

And I understand all that. But I have the right to get the medication I need when my doctor prescribes it and not have to worry about what company it comes from. There is no mortal sin here as I am not supporting the abortion industry. I am just getting necessary medical treatment.

 

[ribozyme]

And I understand all that. But I have the right to get the medication I need when my doctor prescribes it and not have to worry about what company it comes from. There is no mortal sin here as I am not supporting the abortion industry. I am just getting necessary medical treatment.

Correct, as those companies, as far as I am concerned, do not publically support abortion.

But at least one drug company is part of the putative “culture of death” as they manufacture a contraception called “depo-subQ provera 104”.

Is it moral for Pfizer to sell that product on the free-market?

 

[goofyjim]

Correct, as those companies, as far as I am concerned, do not publically support abortion.

But at least one drug company is part of the putative “culture of death” as they manufacture a contraception called “depo-subQ provera 104”.

Is it moral for Pfizer to sell that product on the free-market?

Maybe not to our standards, but we should not be in the business of forbidding contraception to those outside the Church. This is where I believe we should not legislate morality. Otherwise we start to create a Catholic theocracy instead of maintaining a democracy.

 

[ribozyme]

Maybe not to our standards, but we should not be in the business of forbidding contraception to those outside the Church. This is where I believe we should not legislate morality. Otherwise we start to create a Catholic theocracy instead of maintaining a democracy.

So why do Catholics support laws against abortion? Isn’t that legislating morality?

 

[Nino]

The free enterprise system was invented by our Jewish brothers in Europe.they were not allowed to join the various guilds etc and so invented capitalism…thats why we hear that the good ole US of A was founded on Judaic-Christian principles! Abortion is the killing of a developing baby with the permision of the temporary host…Our founders defined why they had to leave mother brit…they gave three reasons as so stated in the Dec.of Independence…’‘that all men have the right to life,liberty and the pursuit of happiness…’ the right to life!!! equality only of opportunity…thats all…the French revolution ended up with madame guillotine because of its slogan…" Life,Liberty and Franternity!!! the key is that last word…currently called PC…when one joins a Frat.one gives up all free thinking,independence and must follow the dictates of the lodge…in other words…no more freedom cept for the ruling class…sound familiar…yes its happening here and with a rush…do I hear a horseman in the nite yelling out a warning…???

 

[goofyjim]

So why do Catholics support laws against abortion? Isn’t that legislating morality?

That is killing which is pretty much wrong in anyone’s moral code. But contraception is different.

 

[ribozyme]

That is killing which is pretty much wrong in anyone’s moral code. But contraception is different.

Ok, so how often do you eat factory-farmed meat if you believe killing is wrong?

Personally, I eat salmon about one every ten days and take fish oil capsules everyday as I do not want to die of a myocardial infraction and I want to live long enough to see the eradication of poverty. No, I don’t count myself as a vegetarian as there are people who eat less meat than I do and do not count themselves as vegetarians. So do you eat factory-farmed meat?

 

[goofyjim]

Ok, so how often do you eat factory-farmed meat if you believe killing is wrong?

Personally, I eat salmon about one every ten days and take fish oil capsules everyday as I do not want to die of a myocardial infraction and I want to live long enough to see the eradication of poverty. No, I don’t count myself as a vegetarian as there are people who eat less meat than I do and do not count themselves as vegetarians. So do you eat factory-farmed meat?

You are comparing apples and oranges. I am against the killing of humans, which abortion is. I am not against using animals for food because God put them there for our use.