Over the years I've read many articles and opinions about alternative treatments, many that go far to dismiss them. St. John's wort for depression is a great example of a treatment that has been dismissed by the medical industry. Even now, after it has been clinically proven to be as or more effective than Paxil, with none of the ill side effects, they continue to dismiss it because, they say, "You can't trust suppliers to have a consistent potency or quality".

If they had consumers best interests in mind they would leverage their abilities to create and distribute a consistent product, but they don't. Instead, they keep tweaking the molecular structure of these Paxil like drugs so they can get new patents and sell them at much higher prices.

It's clear to me that we really can't trust corporate pharma's consistency either. The recent spat of contaminated drugs linked to meningitis and other serious illnesses, and Johnson's and Johnson's contaminated Tylenol, are very recent examples of why.

The Supreme Court recently agreed to hear a case about rather it is legal for big pharma to pay small pharma corporations to NOT make generic drugs with a proven history of effectiveness. I can't see any way we can stretch that behavior to make a case that corporate pharma is doing what's best for consumers. That practice is driven solely by greed. It is naive to think this same greedy behavior is not the driving force behind everything they do.

I will be amazed if the SCOTUS rules against this practice. They'll likely say that we cannot force a company to make a product, therefore we cannot stop them from accepting cash to not make a product. Our own government has a history of paying corporate farmers to not produce.

Crazy times we've been living in.