Open Veils · Answer
Big Pharma the OG subscription plan
The pharmaceutical business model has been structurally oriented toward chronic disease management rather than cures since at least the mid-20th century. Gary Taubes, Nina Teicholz, and Robert Malone have each documented how financial incentives systematically suppress metabolic and curative research in favor of lifetime-maintenance drug regimens. RFK Jr. and Peter McCullough have argued this is not incidental but constitutive of the industry's revenue architecture. The GLP-1 subscription boom — now explicitly bifurcating membership fees from drug costs — is the latest iteration of a model Catherine Austin Fitts calls 'pay-per-body.'
Evidence
- Gary Taubes, in his work on metabolic disease, identified that the pharmaceutical-industrial complex profits most when patients are managed, not cured — insulin dependency being the foundational template.
- Robert Malone and Peter McCullough have both testified that the FDA's revolving door with industry creates regulatory capture that structurally favors recurring-prescription drugs over one-time interventions.
- Richard Werner's monetary circuit analysis, applied by Catherine Austin Fitts to health finance, frames the system as 'harvesting bodies' — chronic illness as a financial asset class, with insurance, pharma, and hospital systems as vertically integrated extractors.
- The GLP-1 wave — semaglutide and tirzepatide — represents the model's current apex.
- Max Gerson and Royal Rife both documented suppression of non-recurring curative modalities in the early 20th century.