It is further testament to the need for medical science and pharmacology to begin to rethink the current approach to advancing the treatment and cure of illness.
During the past two decades, the pharmaceutical industry in particular has focused almost exclusively on an automated, high-tech approach to discovering drugs derived from synthetic compounds and has shunned traditional trial-and-error chemistry and natural compounds.I regret to inform the man who played Cordell Walker that his undoubted ghostwriter is plagiarizing an article by Dan Hurley, written in the New York Times Magazine (emphasis mine):
For the pharmaceutical industry — which during the past two decades has increasingly focused on an automated, high-tech approach to discovering drugs — it would mark a victory for old-fashioned trial-and-error chemistry, the kind of endless tinkering and mucking around in the dark that by now was supposed to be a thing of the past.Mr. Norris, I think you're wrong about the pharmaceutical industry, but that's okay. But I advise you, fire your ghostwriter -- they're not very good.
UPDATE: Oh, the irony. Chuck's ghost also plagiarized celebrated plagiarizer Jonah Lehrer. From the WND article:
Modern pharmaceuticals are supposed to represent the practical payoff of basic high-tech research, yet for every billion dollars invested in research and development since 1950, the number of new drugs approved has continued to fall by one-half every nine years.And from Lehrer's Wired article from 2011:
These troubling trends play out most vividly in the drug industry. Although modern pharmaceuticals are supposed to represent the practical payoff of basic research, the R&D to discover a promising new compound now costs about 100 times more (in inflation-adjusted dollars) than it did in 1950.