>Before we start blaiming the Republicans, you might read this quote from the Orange County Register:
>
>"In 1994, in the early years of the Clinton administration, the government, largely through the involvement of then-first lady Hillary Clinton, decided to do something about the declining availability of vaccine for children. Unfortunately, as Grace-Marie Turner of the Galen Institute, a think tank specializing in health policy issues, reminded us, the Vaccines for Children program, set up in 1994, consisted of making the government the purchaser of 60 percent of vaccine for children - at deeply discounted prices. This made vaccine manufacturing even less profitable - or money-losing for some companies - and more companies simply got out of the business."
>
>
>
>

Dale;

Thank you for quoting the source. The Orange County Register is known as a conservative Republican newspaper. That may bias the viewpoint of what they have to say. Or do all sources of the media tell the “truth”?

The following is not aimed at you but at the content of the quoted article.

I wonder why pharmaceutical companies in other countries are still in business even though they charge a fraction of what United States companies charge for the same drugs?

The comment, “more companies simply got out of the business”, seems interesting.

Perhaps those companies, who elected to get out of the business, were dissatisfied with the reduction in profit experienced. It seems that United States pharmaceutical companies perceive that they should enjoy high profits, rationalize why, and spend billions of dollars a year on advertising and lobbying.

Not knowing all the facts is a disadvantage in understanding a subject. This subject deserves some references such as profits made by each company before and after the government program went into effect. How many companies “got out of the business”?

There seems to be a concept here that has been a part of the United States since our creation: You have to take care of yourself. If you cannot afford to do so then that is your problem. In this case it is obvious that children who cannot afford vaccinations should not receive them. The cost to care for a sick child (start with Polio and go from there) is greater than the cost of vaccinations. But then why care? It is all about profits. If you can afford to pay for vaccinations for your children, why worry about someone who is unable to do so?

Preventative medicine is something that medical insurance companies do not like to pay for. Just a few years ago medical insurance companies would not pay for any type of preventative vaccination. With so many people in this country uninsured there is the potential for great suffering by many. We can afford to fight wars and rebuild countries but cannot afford to take care of our own country or people.

Ones political ideology will not protect you or your children from illness which can be prevented by vaccination.

Tom