Hopefully the deflation scenario due to technology will help with this shift gracefully. Else, it will be extremely difficult.
But if we had deflation in the economy, how will the investment scenario will Peter out is anyone’s guess.
I wonder The people who invented this financial growth will, why they didn’t thought about this in the long term? I guess, I have asked a question which has quite a generic answer already…
All the free claims of facilities here ONLY exists to support corruption. These free things are not materially helping poor people hence everyone seems to be unhappy. For example, in India it takes almost $700k per km of road construct while in the US, it takes only $120k per km to construct the road.
And when it comes to other attributes like quality of the road, speed of the construction or durability of the road.... It's far worst than the USA.
All the Indian govt programs only exists to support their corrupt contractors and not for helping people genuinely.
Absolutely right! This test is hyped. It has abysmally low sensitivity of 16% to detect stage I cancers and overall 44% for cancers of other stages. It is extremely poor sensitivity for any detection test.
It's good that people are focusing on detecting such things early but unfortunately the management of any cancer basically falls into two categories - burn it or remove it. Burning maybe done via radiation, chemo etc. And treating liquid malignancies is even difficult.
I lost my absolutely fit and fine father last year to AML. I couldn't do jack shit about it and have this lingering feeling of how archiac the whole medical science - especially the drug discovery is.
No one in medical field is interested to cure any disease. All want to manage it so that pharma can get as many "subscribers" as possible to keep that money flowing in.
And such novel tests is just another mechanism to enroll new subscribers early in the journey to earn money for some more months. That's all.
> No one in medical field is interested to cure any disease. All want to manage it so that pharma can get as many "subscribers" as possible to keep that money flowing in.
I can assure you this is absolutely, 100% false. *Maybe* at the highest, corporate levels. I've never been privy to that level of discourse. I have however spent a lot of time working with the boots on the ground. Never have I come across a single one who intentionally avoided "a cure".
> No one in medical field is interested to cure any disease. All want to manage it so that pharma can get as many "subscribers" as possible to keep that money flowing in.
Care to support such outrageous claims with actual evidence or?