A forum thread discusses a podcast episode where a guest points out a major company's public stance against compounded peptides from overseas due to safety concerns, even while pursuing a large acquisition of a related foreign firm. Users note the lack of surprise at such contradictions, mention side deals with other providers, and reflect on how profit motives dominate over patient needs in the medical system.
What this discussion establishesNothing here is advice.
A guest on a podcast episode discussed how a major pharmaceutical company is lobbying against compounded peptides from China, claiming they're dangerous, even as they're making a big deal to buy a Chinese peptide company.
I can't recall that guy's name right now but he's a major supporter tied to the present government. That discussion turned out really worthwhile.
Shocking? Nah. They cut a deal with another provider too, as long as they get their cut.
I went through the entire discussion myself. Even though this is a global discussion board, I don't expect the healthcare and coverage challenges in America to get fixed while I'm still around. He pointed out that profit drives everything. The focus really ought to stay on the individual receiving care.
I was more interest in the other discussion in the article for some reason
If you have tried it, this topic is still open. Sign in to reply — it takes a minute.