Buckle up...I just dont see how "Big Pharna" is so demonized...
I mean damn, the drugs can't make themselves. It takes a ton of time, resources, talent, and risk to develop pharmaceutical drugs. The can't sell the drugs at a loss. If they are not covering the cost of development, manufacturing, and earning a profit...they won't exist. You want no drugs or expensive drugs?
Most drug research has to be funded by VC's or grants. It would be strange if it wasnt. Also the US might be the only county that let's the drug companies set the prices with no negotiating all the while advertising on every station possibleI just dont see how "Big Pharna" is so demonized...
I mean damn, the drugs can't make themselves. It takes a ton of time, resources, talent, and risk to develop pharmaceutical drugs. The can't sell the drugs at a loss. If they are not covering the cost of development, manufacturing, and earning a profit...they won't exist. You want no drugs or expensive drugs?
I just dont see how "Big Pharna" is so demonized...
I mean damn, the drugs can't make themselves. It takes a ton of time, resources, talent, and risk to develop pharmaceutical drugs. The can't sell the drugs at a loss. If they are not covering the cost of development, manufacturing, and earning a profit...they won't exist. You want no drugs or expensive drugs?
The Pharmaceutical Industry - True Cost of Heathcare
As I said before, I went over seven years of financial reports for 13 major pharmaceutical companies and here is some of what I found:
-The combined total revenue for all 13 companies over 8 years was about $3.78 Trillion.
-The Combined total profits for these companies was about $744 Billion.
-All 13 pharmaceutical companies spent a total of $643 Billion on research.
-The total amount they spent on marketing was about 60% more than what they spent on research: $1.04 Trillion.
Here’s the same information in two graphs:
Figure 2: Total combined profits earned by all 13 major pharmaceutical companies from 2011-2018 compared to amount spent on marketing and research over the same time period. Proportion of total revenue allocated for each is below (figure 3).
Figure 3
As you can see, the pharmaceutical companies do spend a lot on research but their research budgets are dwarfed by their marketing budgets. They also made more in profits each year, on average, than they spent on research.
So let’s do some estimates. Just as an example, we’ll take that dose of Xarelto that we get for $14.37 and the Canadians for about $3. The pill most likely costs just a few cents to manufacture (we know that from the cost of the generics), so the $14.37 is mostly profit. But they charge (us in the U.S.) $14.37, they say, to cover the cost of discovering it.
Yet from their own statements, only about $2.44 of the $14.37 (17%) goes into research. Another $2.73 is pure, after-tax profit, and a whopping 27%, or about $3.88 of that $14.37 pill goes, not to the scientists at the pharmaceutical companies, but toward buying all of those medication ads you love so much. So most of what we “buy,” when we pay the highest drug prices in the world, is high corporate profits and lots of television commercials of middle-aged men with very pretty wives.
They don't develop these medications they pretty much buy rights to government funded research and then sell the shyt to the public 10x the price....or more.I just dont see how "Big Pharna" is so demonized...
I mean damn, the drugs can't make themselves. It takes a ton of time, resources, talent, and risk to develop pharmaceutical drugs. The can't sell the drugs at a loss. If they are not covering the cost of development, manufacturing, and earning a profit...they won't exist. You want no drugs or expensive drugs?
this is precisely what i didn't get about the disrespect towards Cory Booker when he voted down that bill to import drugs.I just dont see how "Big Pharna" is so demonized...
I mean damn, the drugs can't make themselves. It takes a ton of time, resources, talent, and risk to develop pharmaceutical drugs. The can't sell the drugs at a loss. If they are not covering the cost of development, manufacturing, and earning a profit...they won't exist. You want no drugs or expensive drugs?
The USA leads the world in orphan drug research primarily BECAUSE government alone can't finance the incentive research rare drug therapies for rare diseases.They don't develop these medications they pretty much buy rights to government funded research and then sell the shyt to the public 10x the price....or more.
Don't cape for greed
Get help.So?
A lot of people don't live in districts like rural vermont with no jobs.
"The U.S. taxpayer has funded research for every single one of the 210 new drugs that the FDA approved between 2010-16. Yet the companies that have access to this research are increasingly viewing pharmaceuticals in the same way that banks view their financial product — opportunities for short-term returns."The USA leads the world in orphan drug research primarily BECAUSE government alone can't finance the incentive research rare drug therapies for rare diseases.
On top of that, pharmaceuticals is one area where the USA has a clear dominance over the rest of the world and I hope it continues.