Big Pharma Spends More On Advertising Than Research And Development

[Moby]

Watching night time TV on any station makes it pretty clear that the drug companies have stepped up advertising in a very big way but I had no idea it was so much more then research.

I think we should be allowed to buy drugs from Canada.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/01/080105140107.htm
Big Pharma Spends More On Advertising Than Research And Development, Study Finds
ScienceDaily (Jan. 7, 2008) — A new study by two York University researchers estimates the U.S. pharmaceutical industry spends almost twice as much on promotion as it does on research and development, contrary to the industry’s claim.

The researchers’ estimate is based on the systematic collection of data directly from the industry and doctors during 2004, which shows the U.S. pharmaceutical industry spent 24.4% of the sales dollar on promotion, versus 13.4% for research and development, as a percentage of US domestic sales of US$235.4 billion.

The research is co-authored by PhD candidate Marc-André Gagnon, who led the study with Joel Lexchin, a long-time researcher of pharmaceutical promotion, Toronto physician, and Associate Chair of York’s School of Health Policy & Management in the Faculty of Health.

“In our paper, we make the case for the need for a new estimate of promotional expenditures by the U.S. pharmaceutical industry,” says Gagnon. “We then explain how we used proprietary databases to construct a revised estimate and finally, we compare our results with those from other data sources to argue in favor of changing the priorities of the industry.”

The study is important because it provides the most accurate image yet of the promotional workings of the pharmaceutical industry, says Lexchin.

The authors examined the 2004 reports of IMS Health (IMS) and CAM Group (CAM), two international market research companies that provide the pharmaceutical industry with sales/marketing data and consulting services. IMS obtains its data by surveying pharmaceutical firms, while CAM surveys doctors, which explains important discrepancies in the data they provide.

The researchers used 2004 as the comparison year because it was the latest year in which information was available from both organizations.

CAM reported total promotion spending by the U.S. pharmaceutical industry as US$33.5 billion in their 2004 report, while IMS reported US$27.7 billion for the same year. The authors observed, however, important differences in figures according to each promotion category. By selectively using both sets of figures provided by IMS and CAM, in order to determine the most relevant data for each category, and adjusting for methodological differences between the ways IMS and CAM collect data, the authors arrived at US$57.5 billion for the total amount spent on pharmaceutical promotion in 2004. The industry spent approximately US$61,000 in promotion per physician during 2004, according to Gagnon.

“Even our revised promotion figure for 2004 is apt to be understated, as there are other promotion avenues that are not likely to be taken into consideration by IMS or CAM, such as ghost-writing and off-label promotion,” says Gagnon. “Also, seeding trials, which are designed to promote the prescription of new drugs, may be allocated to other budget categories.”

IMS and CAM data were used for comparison purposes because data from both are publicly available, both operate globally and are well regarded by the pharmaceutical industry, and both break down their information by different promotion categories. Most importantly, the two organizations use different methods for gathering their data, allowing the researchers to triangulate on a more accurate figure for each promotion category.

The authors focused their study on the United States because it is the only country in which information is available for all of the major promotion categories, and it is also the largest market for pharmaceuticals in the world, representing approximately 43% of global sales and global promotion expenditures.

Gagnon’s and Lexchin’s new estimate of total promotional costs is also consistent with estimates of promotional spending by the U.S. pharmaceutical industry from other sources they scrutinized, including reports by Consumers International, a non-governmental organization which represents consumer groups and agencies worldwide; Office of Technology Assessment, which extrapolated results from the cost structure of Eli Lilly, a global pharmaceutical company; Marcia Angell, former editor-in-chief of the New England Journal of Medicine, who extrapolated data from Novartis Inc., a company which distinguishes marketing from administration expenditures in its annual reports; and the United Nations Industrial Development Organization.

As well, note the authors, the number of meetings for promotional purposes has dramatically increased in the U.S. pharmaceutical industry, jumping from 120,000 in 1998 to 371,000 in 2004, further supporting their findings that the U.S. pharmaceutical industry is marketing-driven.

Thus, the study’s findings supports the position that the U.S. pharmaceutical industry is marketing-driven and challenges the perception of a research-driven, life-saving, pharmaceutical industry, while arguing in favour of a change in the industry’s priorities in the direction of less promotion, according to Gagnon and Lexchin.

Their study, “The Cost of Pushing Pills: A New Estimate of Pharmaceutical Promotion Expenditures in the United States,” appears in the January 3, 2008 issue of PLoS Medicine, an online journal published by the Public Library of Science.

[disrupter]

They forever whine about all that money they spend on research when in fact they spend more on marketing. Add to that their lawyers trying to game the patent system to drag drugs beyond their patent life.

They are a bunch of lying greed mongers.

They twist & corrupt the FDA & its approval process, but congress is partly to blame here because they don't want to properly fund the FDA so it gets passed to drug companies to pay & those who pay call the plays.

Drug prices are one of the biggest inflationary factors of Healthcare.
The cost of prescription drugs rose at rates higher than the rate of inflation from 2000 to 2005, which made prescription drug costs among the fastest-growing in health care, according to a federal tracking report released in October.http://pn.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/content/full/42/23/12-a

Probably time for single payer healthcare.

[Cat slave]

But where would we be without them? They are a business in the business of
turning a profit. They invest much money in the creation of new medicines and
I dont think we would get as good a result if it was under government control
or way, volunteers?????

I personally dont have a problem with companies making money and am glad
they have come up with so many solutions to managing dreaded diseases.
People who cannot afford them can get help from the companies or from
government programs. It would be good if they started off costing as much
as they (after time)do when they become generic but theres no money in
that and I sure dont want anything I take coming from China!!!!

If we or the gov put restrictions on their profits they will stop working as
hard.....as would I......and we will find ourselves facing catastrophic diseases
with no new and better treatments. I dont want to take that chance and I
dont want drugs from China or anything that came from China or off the
black market.

[disrupter]

Cat Slave is a real cave in ain't she.

Please lie down & take it, kitty honey while the Drug steamroller runs over you flat.

Look it is intellectual road kill,
used to go by the name of Cat Slave.

now i understand the 'slave' part.
do you put your own shackles on too?

NEVER GET BETWEEN A JUNKIE & THEIR PUSHER.

AMERICA A NATION OF ADDICTS.

[Little Red Dog]

But where would we be without them? They are a business in the business of
turning a profit. They invest much money in the creation of new medicines and
....

...and in 2005-2006 they hired 1,100 lobbyists and invested $182 million in lobbying Capitol Hill.

Big Pharma is not your friend.

Read it (http://www.publicintegrity.org/rx/report.aspx?aid=823)and weep...

[Moby]

...and in 2005-2006 they hired 1,100 lobbyists and invested $182 million in lobbying Capitol Hill.

Big Pharma is not your friend.

Read it (http://www.publicintegrity.org/rx/report.aspx?aid=823)and weep...
Didn't Fred get some money from a Pharma group to lobby congress? I wonder how much they want him in office.

[Little Red Dog]

I have done the fact-check, but I doubt that there is anyone on Capitol Hill who isn't tainted - to some degree - by Big Pharma money.

[Cat slave]

...and in 2005-2006 they hired 1,100 lobbyists and invested $182 million in lobbying Capitol Hill.

Big Pharma is not your friend.

Read it (http://www.publicintegrity.org/rx/report.aspx?aid=823)and weep...

And there are not lobbyists representing all sorts of groups as illegals, foreign
nations and assorted corporations, in our countrys hallowed halls?

Of course. Every special interest group is represented by a paid lobbyist.
Why should the R&D people who create medicines to relieve pain and suffering
less represented?

[disrupter]

the are far better described as a marketing firm that pushes drugs on TV & does some incidental research to prop up their marketing.

[Cat slave]

So, from the negative posts against the evil drug companies I assume that
you are all mixing your own herbal remedies plucked from your front yard?
That you do not benefit from anything the evil potion mixers cast up on the
market?? That should you face a catastrophic disease that you would
refuse treatment with the latest new generation drug on the grounds that
they are profitable and evil and you will not contribute to their greediness????

Hell, not me. I want to be cured if I get sick!!!!! Anyone who wishes to take
their noble consciences to the grave can do so. I want to live.

[Little Red Dog]

And there are not lobbyists representing all sorts of groups as illegals, foreign
nations and assorted corporations, in our countrys hallowed halls?

Of course. Every special interest group is represented by a paid lobbyist.
Why should the R&D people who create medicines to relieve pain and suffering
less represented?

They're not less represented. Next to Big Oil, they have one of the strongest lobbies on Capitol Hill.

If you think THAT doesn't influence the drugs you're being offered, or the prices you pay, you're dreaming.

They spend more on adverising than they do on R&D. Believe it or not, that really DOES include R in a big way. The lobbists' job is to grease the wheels to bring a drug to market. And many times, that means hushing up research results, or outright concealing them.

Fosamax is a recent example of that. More research would have revealed the devastating (and irrerversible) side effects of that class of biophonsphonate drugs. But the push to market eliminated that. Now people are paying for it with their health.

[disrupter]

I admit to taking aspirin. Some B & C vitamins.

I wonder how much of the pharmaceutical advances occur at Universities?
Certainly much of the semi-conductor research goes on there.

A lot of the drugs they hype on TV are no better & sometimes worse or a least not vetted than the older, off-patent, drugs.

They just cost more money & have great TV promo.

Where is my vomit bucket when i see a Celebrex, Vioxx, Vesicare, Nexium, with all the happy dope heads dancing around in some sylvan setting.

The smoother the TV gloss the more rotten the company.

Are they really better than legalized drug pushers?

[Little Red Dog]

So, from the negative posts against the evil drug companies I assume that
you are all mixing your own herbal remedies plucked from your front yard?
That you do not benefit from anything the evil potion mixers cast up on the
market?? That should you face a catastrophic disease that you would
refuse treatment with the latest new generation drug on the grounds that
they are profitable and evil and you will not contribute to their greediness????

Hell, not me. I want to be cured if I get sick!!!!! Anyone who wishes to take
their noble consciences to the grave can do so. I want to live.

There is a growing body of evidence that nutrition plays a HUGE part in whether or not you develop certain diseases, including some kinds of cancers.

The drug companines have fought the alternative health market for decades. Now that the market for alternative remedies is growing, many of the Big Pharma boys are now putting out their own line of nutraceuticals. And the fact is that many of the synthetic drugs are developed from properties discovered in nature.

A drug is not always the best answer. Although it is often the only alternative presented. Just like everything else, people should take the responsibility to be fully informed.

[kres24GT]

What is the point here? My only remark as is, would be "so what?"

[Moby]

Most of the drugs advertised on TV need to be advertised because there isn't enough demand for them. If there was and they worked well there would be no need to advertise.

I like the fact that some advances are being made but I've been up close and personal to the machine out there and it's not designed to make you better. It's designed to keep you going and addicted.

[disrupter]

These companies are NOT on a mission to help people
they ARE on a mission to make the most money they can.

That tells it all.

[Cat slave]

There is a growing body of evidence that nutrition plays a HUGE part in whether or not you develop certain diseases, including some kinds of cancers.

The drug companines have fought the alternative health market for decades. Now that the market for alternative remedies is growing, many of the Big Pharma boys are now putting out their own line of nutraceuticals. And the fact is that many of the synthetic drugs are developed from properties discovered in nature.

A drug is not always the best answer. Although it is often the only alternative presented. Just like everything else, people should take the responsibility to be fully informed.


Yes, you are right. The further we get from nature the more problems we
will have. We need to eat whole, raw foods in the proper ratios. And Ive
used alternative med on myself and my animals with great success, but
there are a lot of people walking around today who are alive because of
new generation pharmaseuticals and many are derived from nature.
Youre preaching to the choir on this LRD, but faced with something really
horrible I would embrace the most current treatment and support with
neutraceuticals. And I would choose after much research. Im just glad
there are proven treatments used in the field and shown success.
Doesnt hurt to consider everything.

[Cat slave]

Most of the drugs advertised on TV need to be advertised because there isn't enough demand for them. If there was and they worked well there would be no need to advertise.

I like the fact that some advances are being made but I've been up close and personal to the machine out there and it's not designed to make you better. It's designed to keep you going and addicted.

Some of those advertisements are pure black comedy. They show a happy
healthy person then rattle off the side affects....good lord....Id rather have
the disease I think!

I saw one for Avilify or something like that for bi polar and the possible
side effects were horrendous. Maybe a little mental illness would be safer.:D

[Cat slave]

They're not less represented. Next to Big Oil, they have one of the strongest lobbies on Capitol Hill.

If you think THAT doesn't influence the drugs you're being offered, or the prices you pay, you're dreaming.

They spend more on adverising than they do on R&D. Believe it or not, that really DOES include R in a big way. The lobbists' job is to grease the wheels to bring a drug to market. And many times, that means hushing up research results, or outright concealing them.

Fosamax is a recent example of that. More research would have revealed the devastating (and irrerversible) side effects of that class of biophonsphonate drugs. But the push to market eliminated that. Now people are paying for it with their health.


It is a business and the function of such is to make money.

I wouldnt use anything that had not been used in the field for a very long
time....the FDA is a joke, to bring in another issue.

Isnt Foxamax that drug Sally Field supposedly takes??? Not that it matters,
just trying to place the drug and she comes to mind. Ive not read anything
about the drug though.

[disrupter]

The reason the FDA is a joke is because the congress refuses to fund them.

They drug companies are footing much of the bill,
he who pays the piper picks his tunes.

[Little Red Dog]

It is a business and the function of such is to make money.

But at whose expense?


Isnt Foxamax that drug Sally Field supposedly takes???...

Can't remember. But those drugs cause osteonecrosis, most notably of the jaw.

With long-term use, it kills the cells that makes new bone tissue. Your bones decay and die. Then they snap without warning and for no reason at all. In osteonecrosis of the jaw they have to remove the dead jawbone (and your teeth) surgically.

It's not reversible. Not pretty.

[Cat slave]

Why is it at someones "expense"?

Oh good grief.....I hadnt heard about Fosamax. Intuition tells you it cant
be good....not the natural order of things!

[Americanadian]

Well, yes to a degree, pharma funds will be prevalent in politics. Who do you think funds the Medical educational process in Universities and Colleges? If one is wary of Big Pharma influencing those truth lovin' career politicians, imagine your dismay upon learning that generations of Medical professionals have been educated to believe just what Big Pharma wants them to believe.

[kres24GT]

These companies are NOT on a mission to help people
they ARE on a mission to make the most money they can.

That tells it all.


Of course they are. That is the goal of a company. Of course it's hard to make profit if you don't help people. most consumers don't pay for things that don't increase their joy of life in some way.

[kres24GT]

The reason the FDA is a joke is because the congress refuses to fund them.

They drug companies are footing much of the bill,
he who pays the piper picks his tunes.


Precisely why independent 3rd parties with profit lines to maintain would make a better judge, not a government monopoly open for sale.

[kres24GT]

But at whose expense?





At the expense of their consumers. This is how business works.

[disrupter]

enjoy your Vioxx, kres.

will you want flowers at your funeral?

[kres24GT]

enjoy your Vioxx, kres.

will you want flowers at your funeral?



Sorry, but I still don't get your point. Pharma companies have a product, it is theirs and you and I are not entitled to it. To get it we msut pay the price they set.

If you think all medicine should be free then vote for socialized medicine where government provides all the meds people need at tax payer expense. Forcing companies to provide their products, their possessions, at a price other than what they are willing to sell it for is disgusting. I would never want government to tell me what I can sell my possessions for, or how much profit I can make. I extend the same courtesy to others.

[disrupter]

The FDA is about government regulation & safety, you are arguing a different issue on this.

You expect to get responsible governance gratis from some vested interest,

You expect a free lunch,

You are a fool.

I think all drugs should be legal,
just say no to arbitrary nanny state.

[kres24GT]

The FDA is about government regulation & safety, you are arguing a different issue on this.

You expect to get responsible governance gratis from some vested interest,

You expect a free lunch,

You are a fool.

I think all drugs should be legal,
just say no to arbitrary nanny state.


The FDA is about appeasing the ignorant masses.

All drugs should be legal and should be no concern of the FDA, no one should be able to tell me what I can put in my body.

[disrupter]

Well at least we agree on that.

People need as much neutral, unspun information about them as a responsible government can provide.

Drug companies should charge any damn price they want,
They can't TELL the US government it is legally bared from negotiation,
or deny people the right to re-import from Canada.

Negotiation is what the free market does.
Haggling like any REAL marketplace.

[kres24GT]

Well at least we agree on that.

People need as much neutral, unspun information about them as a responsible government can provide.

Drug companies should charge any damn price they want,
They can't TELL the US government it is legally bared from negotiation,
or deny people the right to re-import from Canada.


Agree on the last part completely. If you want to complain about pharma lobbies using the power of corrupt government to increase their profits, I agree 100%. However we only vote for corrupt politcians who are always willing to sell out the American people and tell us its for our own good.

Responsible government is an oxymoron. Government is in its very nature corrupt, inefficient, and anything but responsible.

[disrupter]

Government is often more efficient than the profiteering private sector,
despite propaganda to the contrary.

I am not a huge fan of big government, but when corporate corruption has bloated it for their own wicked ends it IS an improvement to re-direct that government spending to reasonably responsible programs that work for actual Americans instead of ex-patriot, tax dodging, lobbying corporations.

[Cat slave]

At the expense of their consumers. This is how business works.

Isnt everything at the expense of the consumer?

Our "public servants" are not doing it for nothing, doctors, stylists, car repair
shops, drug stores or anything does it for any lofty ideal. They do it to make
money and we hopefully receive a good outcome from the services. I dont
know of anything or anyone who does anything for free. Not even a preacher
or a church.

[kres24GT]

Government is often more efficient than the profiteering private sector,
despite propaganda to the contrary.

I am not a huge fan of big government, but when corporate corruption has bloated it for their own wicked ends it IS an improvement to re-direct that government spending to reasonably responsible programs that work for actual Americans instead of ex-patriot, tax dodging, lobbying corporations.

The line between the two is becoming dim.

[Cat slave]

Agree on the last part completely. If you want to complain about pharma lobbies using the power of corrupt government to increase their profits, I agree 100%. However we only vote for corrupt politcians who are always willing to sell out the American people and tell us its for our own good.

Responsible government is an oxymoron. Government is in its very nature corrupt, inefficient, and anything but responsible.


Guess its true that we get the government we deserve or bought and paid
for.:banghead: .....but not all of us asked for a lot of things.

[kres24GT]

Isnt everything at the expense of the consumer?

Our "public servants" are not doing it for nothing, doctors, stylists, car repair
shops, drug stores or anything does it for any lofty ideal. They do it to make
money and we hopefully receive a good outcome from the services. I dont
know of anything or anyone who does anything for free. Not even a preacher
or a church.


Yes, that was my point. Few people pay for something that will impact their life negatively, or at least that they perceive negatively.

[Peregrine]

I have done the fact-check, but I doubt that there is anyone on Capitol Hill who isn't tainted - to some degree - by Big Pharma money.

No your right...I worked for a Pharma co for over 30 years...let me tell you they increased their pricing like clockwork in December and April. It was always research...but alot of their research is done through grants and teaching hospitals so I don't think they have a leg to stand on as far as that goes.

[disrupter]

Corporations do not have the right to use government to outlaw the free market,

and that is exactly what they are doing.

They are gaming the system,

& you & i lose while they gain from their theft of our republic's intent to serve us.

[Peregrine]

They forever whine about all that money they spend on research when in fact they spend more on marketing. Add to that their lawyers trying to game the patent system to drag drugs beyond their patent life.

They are a bunch of lying greed mongers.

They twist & corrupt the FDA & its approval process, but congress is partly to blame here because they don't want to properly fund the FDA so it gets passed to drug companies to pay & those who pay call the plays.

Drug prices are one of the biggest inflationary factors of Healthcare.
http://pn.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/content/full/42/23/12-a

Probably time for single payer healthcare.

Correct!!!!

[kres24GT]

Corporations do not have the right to use government to outlaw the free market,

and that is exactly what they are doing.

They are gaming the system,

& you & i lose while they gain from their theft of our republic's intent to serve us.


I agree with you here, but again we as a country only want to elect politcians who will sell out the American people.

[Cat slave]

I still say I am glad they have created drugs that combat disease and that
they should receive compensation for their r&d. Got a better idea?

[disrupter]

kres, Yes, but that is because we are misinformed, partly by external manipulations, partly by our non-addressing of our own self-indulgent thought processes.

I think the requirement that political campaigns only get contributions from registered voters of their district/area would go a HUGE way to clean up the system. That often happens with public finance too, where politicians no longer have to spend 9/10ths of their time pandering to big moneyed interests & they start talking, communicating & listening to voters.

Other, big money, can buy all the independent air time they want, but never with any direct access or implied quid pro quo for candidates.

I think the other short coming is ourselves. To not be reasonable & measured in our expectations of government.
No big Nanny.
We are adults, with the concerns of adults & when something can only be properly addressed by government do we seek government actions.
By not being dependent on government we grant ourselves freedom & independence from government & responsible government should be allied with us in that.

[kres24GT]

kres, Yes, but that is because we are misinformed, partly by external manipulations, partly by our non-addressing of our own self-indulgent thought processes.

I think the requirement that political campaigns only get contributions from registered voters of their district/area would go a HUGE way to clean up the system. That often happens with public finance too, where politicians no longer have to spend 9/10ths of their time pandering to big moneyed interests & they start talking, communicating & listening to voters.

Other, big money, can buy all the independent air time they want, but never with any direct access or implied quid pro quo for candidates.

I think the other short coming is ourselves. To not be reasonable & measured in our expectations of government.
No big Nanny.
We are adults, with the concerns of adults & when something can only be properly addressed by government do we seek government actions.
By not being dependent on government we grant ourselves freedom & independence from government & responsible government should be allied with us in that.


The easiest way is to never vote for Republicans or Democrats, these parties are 100% sold out to corporate interest. 2nd, never vote for a guy who has been in office longer than 4 years.

Of course this is not what people want. Americans want a nanny state, most demand it.

[Cat slave]

I agree with you here, but again we as a country only want to elect politcians who will sell out the American people.

And dont you think that is from the entitlement mindset?? People dont look
at the countrys direction or needs but instead "what will "sew in sew" do for me?"
What whoever can "get" out of it!!!!!

I dont think we WANT to vote for people who sell us out but they always
promise.........CHANGE!:lmao2: .....and what do we get? Same song, different
verse, same and getting worse outcome.

You know how they all "feel our pain".....oh puhleeze, give it a rest!:mad:

[Cat slave]

The easiest way is to never vote for Republicans or Democrats, these parties are 100% sold out to corporate interest. 2nd, never vote for a guy who has been in office longer than 4 years.

Of course this is not what people want. Americans want a nanny state, most demand it.

Yeah, have "set in stone" one term limit. No negotiation on it. See how many
run and spend so much money to get in office then. We might actually
see a few people who want to serve the public for a change.

[kres24GT]

And dont you think that is from the entitlement mindset?? People dont look
at the countrys direction or needs but instead "what will "sew in sew" do for me?"
What whoever can "get" out of it!!!!!

I dont think we WANT to vote for people who sell us out but they always
promise.........CHANGE!:lmao2: .....and what do we get? Same song, different
verse, same and getting worse outcome.

You know how they all "feel our pain".....oh puhleeze, give it a rest!:mad:


"Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country."

No politician would ever dare say this today. Today's politcians run almost on exclusively on how will I use the tax dollars they steal from the American people to benefit specific groups. Vote for me and you will get this. Vote for the other guy and he will take away that.

[disrupter]

The corporations keep asking what can this country do for them.

We, the American people need to tell them nothing except provide you with a clean, fair, honest [perhaps low tax] marketplace.

They must rise or fall on their own ACTUAL merits alone.

Neither corporations nor the American people should be allowed to be overly dependent on government.

We are all adults & should act accordingly. [theoretical adults in the case of corporations]

[kres24GT]

The corporations keep asking what can this country do for them.

We, the American people need to tell them nothing except provide you with a clean, fair, honest [perhaps low tax] marketplace.

They must rise or fall on their own ACTUAL merits alone.

Neither corporations nor the American people should be allowed to be overly dependent on government.

We are all adults & should act accordingly. [theoretical adults in the case of corporations]


100% Agree.

[disrupter]

I guess the one caveat is that corporations by their nature are big & must exercise some care in not running over people.

Single individuals can not act hysterically and usurily attack corporations without some well founded rational basis either.

No one gets undue sympathy or privileges.

[Cat slave]

"Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country."

No politician would ever dare say this today. Today's politcians run almost on exclusively on how will I use the tax dollars they steal from the American people to benefit specific groups. Vote for me and you will get this. Vote for the other guy and he will take away that.

Exactly right!:thumbsup: