Re: Big Pharma Spends More On Advertising Than Research

[Guest guest]

The problem is that the advertising is geared toward the general public who may or may not have one drop of medical knowledge or understanding. It is very troubling to me when I hear those TV ads advising, "Ask your doctor if [name of drug] is right for you?" Lee <jackalope_lepus@...> wrote: Big Pharma Spends More On Advertising Than ResearchJanuary 8th, 2008A drug company is a commercial business whose focus is to research,develop, market and/or distribute drugs, most commonly in the

contextof healthcare; from wikipedia. But according to a study by two YorkUniversity researchers estimates the U.S. pharmaceutical industryspends almost twice as much on promotion as it does on research anddevelopment, contrary to the industry's claim.But how could this be you might ask yourself. Well the answer isfairly easy; regardless of its purpose of helping people it is abussiness and thus it has to make money and the way of making money isby advertising more and researching less. The researchers' estimate isbased on the systematic collection of data directly from the industryand doctors during 2004, which shows the U.S. pharmaceutical industryspent 24.4% of the sales dollar on promotion, versus 13.4% forresearch and development, as a percentage of US domestic sales ofUS$235.4 billion.In case you are wondering who made this study well the research isco-authored by PhD candidate Marc-André Gagnon, who

led the study and Lexchin, a long-time researcher of pharmaceutical promotion,Toronto physician, and Associate Chair of York's School of HealthPolicy & Management in the Faculty of Health."In our paper, we make the case for the need for a new estimate ofpromotional expenditures by the U.S. pharmaceutical industry," saysGagnon. "We then explain how we used proprietary databases toconstruct a revised estimate and finally, we compare our results withthose from other data sources to argue in favor of changing thepriorities of the industry."This study is very important as it shows the most accurate image yetof the promotional workings of the pharmaceutical industry, saysLexchin. But even this could be wrong a bit because there are otheradvertising campaigns which could not be taken into consideration suchas ghost-writing and off-label promotion so in fact these companiesare probably spending more than

twice advertising rather thenresearching. As well, note the authors, the number of meetings forpromotional purposes has dramatically increased in the U.S.pharmaceutical industry, jumping from 120,000 in 1998 to 371,000 in2004, further supporting their findings that the U.S. pharmaceuticalindustry is marketing-driven.http://www.zmescience.com/big-pharma-spends-more-on-advertising-than-research . Do one thing every day that scares you. Eleanor Roosevelt

[Guest guest]

I have enjoyed watching the ads for new drugs showing people on a

beach or diving or on some lush foreign range land, because I figured

that the ads were trying to tell me that while potential patients were

watching this and being told to see their doc, the drug companies were

PAYING for the docs to vacation in such a nice locale, to push their

new drug.

>

> The problem is that the advertising is geared toward the general

public who may or may not have one drop of medical knowledge or

understanding. It is very troubling to me when I hear those TV ads

advising, " Ask your doctor if [name of drug] is right for you? "

[Guest guest]

Actually, the best of these TV ads is "Viva Viagra". Five men are happily singing about how Viagra has changed their lives. The impression is given that Viagra will solve all the problems a man could ever have.Lee <jackalope_lepus@...> wrote: I have enjoyed watching the ads for new drugs showing people on abeach or diving or on some lush foreign range land, because I figuredthat the ads were trying to tell me that while potential patients werewatching this and being told to see their doc, the drug companies

werePAYING for the docs to vacation in such a nice locale, to push theirnew drug.>> The problem is that the advertising is geared toward the generalpublic who may or may not have one drop of medical knowledge orunderstanding. It is very troubling to me when I hear those TV adsadvising, "Ask your doctor if [name of drug] is right for you?" . Do one thing every day that scares you. Eleanor Roosevelt

[Guest guest]

I have seen that ad, tho I wish that I had not. I presume that while

we listen to Viva Viagra, the docs are singing Viva Las Vegas and

enjoying the place courtesy of the drug companies.

Our tax code needs to change so that all of this advertising money is

taxed away. Drug propaganda serves no useful purpose for adults and

it persuades children that a drug can indeed solve all problems.

Better that the money be thrown away than that it fund such

advertisements.

>

> Actually, the best of these TV ads is " Viva Viagra " . Five men are

happily singing about how Viagra has changed their lives. The

impression is given that Viagra will solve all the problems a man

could ever have.