You are wrong on all accounts, but that is your problem.

People don't - and never did - go to the USA for CHEAP treatment but for treatment that was not available in their country. And usually that treatment was EXPENSIVE.

Free markets don't work like you believe thy do. Look at your country ...

USA today has NOTHING TO DO with free markets, it's a corrupt socialist/fascist state without any free market, a collectivised nightmare.
USA is not socialist. They may be fascist to a certain degree, but the correct term is "money aristocracy" or "neo feudalism", and ofc it is political probably the most corrupt and bigot country on the world ...

I suggest you immigrate to there and get a closer look :D your arguments seem rather propaganda based then on any facts.

Actually how the immune system works is understood since decades, on a certain level at least.

The process is fairly random though - your body throws random shit at the infection until something sticks well enough to wipe it out
No it does not. The first line are macrophages and leucocytes. If they "eat" infected cells, they expose "foreign" proteins etc. on their hull. As examples for the antibody factories to find fitting antibodies exactly against those proteins.

As a result many people find really effective solutions and become effectively immune, but others just get a boost in their resistance - hopefully enough to keep them alive until their immune systems can find a better solution, but there are no guarantees.
That is nonsense. While a small percentage (below 1%) does not get immune, all the others develop the exact same antibody, hence we have so many antibody based tests for illnesses (like for HIV or Ebola).

The background is that most vaccinations only involve X sessions. For measles e.g. X == 2. If they would actually test if the person has developed anti bodies after 2 vaccinations they could decide if he needs one more. That ofc. again only works on those persons that indeed have no problem with their immune system.

No, the atmosphere would weaken the gamma ray, not filter it completely.
Literature is full with examples where physicists assume that a near by super nova will, and likely already has several times, wipe out life on earth.

but the many "specific" countries with high population growth rates.
Since widely availability of contraception, and most notable TV, such countries don't exist anymore :D

Sure, a few nations still have a noticeable grows, but imho the population growth is under control since minimum 30 years.

So the main problem is still pollution, erosion, distribution, and behind that imperialism (no matter if religion based in Africa or foreign influence in Asia or south america), wrong approaches in globalization, corruption etc.

The population growth in India, or any other place of the world, has nothing to do with land erosion and loss of agrarian soil or water problems in the USA.

CoR is warning about erosion like in the USA ... your point?

So: limiting populations, how ever you want to achieve that, solves nothing until you start stopping the practices that lead to erosion, land loss and waste of water and finally other resources (like empty oceans).

Yes that is well known :D

But what was your point?

Perhaps I should have said "natural antibiotcs", sulfur and arsenic based and even quicksilver based was known before, since roughly 1880 or something, to lazy to google that for you :D

Stop insulting people.

Healthcare never was cheap in the USA, no idea where you get that idiotic idea from.

Free markets are the anti driver for stuff like health care. The proof is the USA and the cheap health care in Cuba, Europe or Scandinavia or Japan, or even China.

Sorry, that is not correct.

The research and discovery of penicillin where not in a research project for antibiotics or something.

It was discovered 1929, in an unrelated research.

1938/1939 the first systematic search/research for "substances that kill bacteria" was conducted, and Penicillin was "rediscovered" or more precisely systematically tested again. Around 1943 research/development for a production process startet.

Yes, WWII was the main driver for it.

The first thing is to understand that systematic R&D is mainly time consuming and not really a money issue.

Finding a substance that kills bacteria but not the people taking that substance is still simply a matter of chance. And afterwards ofc comes the expensive part, finding a suitable way of producing it and do the trials and approvals.

Phages are not to big to enter the human blood stream, how do you come to thst idea.
Phages as desinfection, wow ... I really wonder why no one came to that idea.

America does not have a cheap medical system.

My ex girlfriend worked as director in a quite big financial institution. She has kind of cyst at her womb. Was already removed once, in the USA, but not properly. (They actually wanted to remove her womb etc. but she refused)

Now she is about to either get it removed in France, where she is living right now but has no heathcare and the american healthcar _refuses_ to pay the operation in France or to let it be done in the states.

In France, as she has no healthcare but limited residential rights for family reasons, the city would sponsor the operation. The total cost would be something like $500 plus perhaps, that would be decided later, another $500-$1000 for staying one or two days in the hospital.

The health insurance in the states argues: they have no experiance with the french approach (endoscopic operation) and if there are complications it might get expensive.

On the other hand they offer her a flight to the USA and back to France, a 'hard core traditional cut her up and cut it out' operation that costs in the $10.000 range, a minimum stay in the hospital if 7 days for another $1000 each day. So we talk about close to $20,000 for an operation in the USA, which would cost less than $2000 in Paris, and on top of that, because her family lives there: the city would pay it!

Everything we europeans hear about american health care is: it is ridiculous expensive and the poor have no insurance. People get rejected from entering a hospital, even under life threatening situations if they can not show money or an insurance. Sorry, that are third world country levels. (yes, I know that Obama intoduced AHCA meanwhile)

So your stupid anti communism hate back fired imho into your face.

Pennicillin was not developed. It was found by accident. It costed basicly nothing.

As penicillin is the first antibiotic medical (besides plenty of herbs/oils that have antibiotic properties) man kind discovered, or lets call it: the first modern antibiotics, I really wonder what people learn in school our days.

Everyone should know how it was discovered and nearly got thrown away as a failed experiment (and probably was thrown away by plenty of other researches befor for that reason).

I don't know why the myth that FDA approval costs a billion is floating around here.
You can easy google for that. It seems if it is expensive it is around 140M, which is quite a lot, but not a billion.

http://www.fastcompany.com/146...

The amount of antibiotic drugs we have in usage is likely less than two dozens.

The amount of drugs for any kind of treatment are likely in the ten thousands.

If it was so easy to 'find' new antibiotics, we would not have this article :)

How about: people get at least the slightest clue about the topic?

Your argumentation makes no sense.
As long as your infection is not resistent to the cheap 'generic version' you take that one. No other extra cost involved for you or your health insurance.
If your infection is resistent, you get the new 5 times as expensive antibiotics. Your health insurance will pay it without argument, as there is no alternative available.

Penicillin was discovered by accident. Obviously its 'development' costed next to ZERO.

Actually, they do use the same drugs on animals as they do in humans.
Actually, thry don't. No idea about the USA, but in most western countries classes of antibiotics exist that are strictly for animal treatment alone. And animals are forbidden to be treated with medicals that are strictly reserved for humans, so that humans still can be treated if bacteria are resistant to some of the stuff reserved for animals only. This praxis is done since the 1970s.
On top of that antibiotics treatments for lifestock is strongly restricted. Meat that contains trace amounts of antibiotics or hormones can not be sold (hence the every few years new bowling 'trade war'/'tariff threats' of the USA against europe, trying to force us to allow import of sub standard meat)