Umm, subby, I think Americans have a history of doing stuff better than the British.

Yeah, look how well a nationalized dental plan has helped the British.

Don't you farking dare take away my free food at department seminars.

My backwoods Arkansas institution is pharma-free.

'Gifts' aren't perks of being a physician. Bribery is the antithesis of evidence-based medicine and science. For shame!

hillbillypharmacist: My backwoods Arkansas institution is pharma-free.

'Gifts' aren't perks of being a physician. Bribery is the antithesis of evidence-based medicine and science. For shame!

we can't even get company pens anymore as students.

/drug co. gifts +/- are not one of the many arguments for a single payer program (NOTE: which is not similar to the UK's system anyway)

This thread is useless without pics of drug salesslutswomen

It's wrong in any system. So is advertising prescription drugs 24/7 on TV & radio, in magazines, etc.

Profiting on human misery is gross.

"Those gifts were bribes? I thought they just liked me."

Overheard.

GoDawgs!: This thread is useless without pics of drug salesslutswomen

One thing I gotta agree with you there, the vendors they send in to my hospital are HOT!

/of course, that's so they'll get more face-time w/ the purchasing agent (doctor or otherwise)

carmody: It's wrong in any system. So is advertising prescription drugs 24/7 on TV & radio, in magazines, etc.

Profiting on human misery is gross.

May be gross, but it makes big money. Seen The Corporation?

Big Pharm definitely does have a ton of influence in politics. But it's one of the things we do best - we don't license a bunch of Chinese meds, do we? There's genuinely innovative research going on there amongst all the lobbying and one-armed men.

Buy our shiat and live better.

Or not.

You need a surgeon?

Tough titty.

Oh yeah, in before the rest of the, "It's NOT Lupus."

syrynxx: Big Pharm definitely does have a ton of influence in politics. But it's one of the things we do best - we don't license a bunch of Chinese meds, do we? There's genuinely innovative research going on there amongst all the lobbying and one-armed men.

So you're saying, that you guys are going to license a bunch of Chinese meds pretty soon?

The arguments against the pharmaceutical industry are so entirely retarded that it boggles the mind that anyone would repeat them. But then again, this is America, where people refuse to get their kids immunized lest the Demons eat them, and one person in five thinks George Bush used his Mind Powers to blow up the WTCs.

Seriously, is there anything Americans hate more than success? "Oh noes, Big Pharma makes a profit!" Funny how we spend the other half of our time calling people "socialists".

DISapproves.

I used to shoot drug sales rep training videos in the early 90's.

They would basically teach them to say anything to get the Doctor to buy the drugs.

Any time the Doc would dispute or question the appropriateness or effectiveness of the drug the rep was to respond with the phrase "Studies have shown...".

Yeah. Guess who's "studies".

Corpus Delecti: The arguments against the pharmaceutical industry are so entirely retarded that it boggles the mind that anyone would repeat them. But then again, this is America, where people refuse to get their kids immunized lest the Demons eat them, and one person in five thinks George Bush used his Mind Powers to blow up the WTCs.

Seriously, is there anything Americans hate more than success? "Oh noes, Big Pharma makes a profit!" Funny how we spend the other half of our time calling people "socialists".

Umm...for the most part I don't think people hate that Pharma makes a profit (previous posters aside), it's that they get involved in government and screw over the sick in order to make a profit. For a good example, please refer to the legislation preventing people from buying cheaper Canadian meds. It's corporate socialism at its worst, and doesn't make Pharma look very good.

But please, continue to generalize.

Lumoclear: "Those gifts were bribes? I thought they just liked me."

Overheard.

That's kind of sad.

shouldn't that have the "SICK" tag?

I have a best friend that is a doctor. There is a reason the script has a carbon, and it isn't to play COA.

/can we say "free all-inclusive first class cruise"

PumpUpDaFark: Yeah, look how well a nationalized dental plan has helped the British.

Ding!
Winnar!

We're done here people..go on home..

I'm confused about this. The NHS has prescribing guidelines, one of which is that generic versions of drugs must be prescribed where available.

Of course quite a few doctors in the UK also do private practice, which is where the pharmaceutical reps might come in.

BTW, dentistry in the UK is by and large private. There are NHS dentists, but good luck finding one that's accepting new patients.

PumpUpDaFark: Yeah, look how well a nationalized dental plan has helped the British.

Best argument against nationalized medicine I can think of.

PumpUpDaFark: Yeah, look how well a nationalized dental plan has helped the British.

You must mean the 40% less decayed, filled and missing teeth (new window) in the UK compared to your privatized dental treatment.

/keep those myths going

anyone catch the thread about fatties in Alabama

liberalish: hillbillypharmacist: My backwoods Arkansas institution is pharma-free.

'Gifts' aren't perks of being a physician. Bribery is the antithesis of evidence-based medicine and science. For shame!

we can't even get company pens anymore as students.

/drug co. gifts +/- are not one of the many arguments for a single payer program (NOTE: which is not similar to the UK's system anyway)

My mom used to bring home all sorts of stuff with pharmaceutical company logos on it. We still have some mugs, shirts, pens, etc.

Is that what they're calling bribes?

carmody: It's wrong in any system. So is advertising prescription drugs 24/7 on TV & radio, in magazines, etc.

Profiting on human misery is gross.

I think it's actually "net".

/human misery is still deductible, right?

Corpus Delecti: The arguments against the pharmaceutical industry are so entirely retarded that it boggles the mind that anyone would repeat them. But then again, this is America, where people refuse to get their kids immunized lest the Demons eat them, and one person in five thinks George Bush used his Mind Powers to blow up the WTCs.

Seriously, is there anything Americans hate more than success? "Oh noes, Big Pharma makes a profit!" Funny how we spend the other half of our time calling people "socialists".

Americans LOVE success. They hate THIEVES. The Mafia makes a profit. That doesn't mean we legalize them. Major problem: Tons of research goes into finding replacements for prescription drugs that are getting ready to go generic. The new ones don't work noticeably better than the old ones - but they DO cost more than generics. They also spend a ton of money developing drugs that compete with other companies' drugs - again, the new ones don't work any better - but they do make money for the company.

Health Care is a necessity, not a luxury. That makes it different than selling makeup or toys or whatever.

DuncanMhor
I'm confused about this. The NHS has prescribing guidelines, one of which is that generic versions of drugs must be prescribed where available.


In Germany it's similar - in theory.
It still leaves some wiggle room if there are different agents against a common symptom: I don't think they write a prescription "something generic against heartburn" but "something generic with X as main agent".

That's where bribing pharmacists (who are supposed to pick one of the generics in Germany) comes into play - and also bribing the companies writing software that pharmacists and doctors use to see which medicaments are available (they pay to be a the top of the result lists).

Also:
doctors can mark a prescription so that the pharmacy has to fulfill it exactly and not use a generic.
=> pharma corp comes in and makes a little (medically useless) change to the old formula and now the doctors have to be lectured during a seminar in Hawaii that there's a new version that will be "better" than those "dated" generics.

Or they pay the doctors to "participate" in studies to see if the new slightly changed agent in FarkitolPLUS is better than the old Farkitol and its generic equivalents.

Both of the above could probably give them a reason to mark a prescription as "don't use a generic" or write one for the slightly changed "new" agent that isn't yet used by something else than FarkitolPLUS.

mikeandeichmann: Umm...for the most part I don't think people hate that Pharma makes a profit (previous posters aside), it's that they get involved in government and screw over the sick in order to make a profit. For a good example, please refer to the legislation preventing people from buying cheaper Canadian meds. It's corporate socialism at its worst, and doesn't make Pharma look very good.

Researching, developing, testing, and bringing a new drug to the market is an incredibly expensive undertaking. Companies need to sell their drugs at higher price for a while to recoup that cost.

Drugs which have been around for a long time, like aspirin, are inexpensive in part because the cost as been recouped, the patents have expired, etc.

Canada has price ceilings on drugs, which keep the companies from recouping their expenses (and thus having more money to spend on developing newer drugs). The companies need to make up the difference, and so have higher prices elsewhere (like in the US).

If the US were to have price ceilings or re-imported drugs from Canada, it's likely that the pace of research would slow, the companies would move out of the US, and overall advancement would decrease. This is a Bad Thing.

/physicist
//has no connection with any drug companies
///thinks price ceilings are foolish

KeatingFive: They also spend a ton of money developing drugs that compete with other companies' drugs - again, the new ones don't work any better - but they do make money for the company.

And then there are the ones patenting gene sequences.

heypete: Researching, developing, testing, and bringing a new drug to the market is an incredibly expensive undertaking

And spending more on marketing than you do on most development, isn't really wise.

Nice strawman headline.

If the US were to have price ceilings or re-imported drugs from Canada, it's likely that the pace of research would slow, the companies would move out of the US, and overall advancement would decrease. This is a Bad Thing.

Move to where?
Most of the important pharmaceutical factories, if not all of them, already exist outside of the United States.
So tell me, where are they going to go?

Corpus Delecti: The arguments against the pharmaceutical industry are so entirely retarded that it boggles the mind that anyone would repeat them. But then again, this is America, where people refuse to get their kids immunized lest the Demons eat them, and one person in five thinks George Bush used his Mind Powers to blow up the WTCs.

Seriously, is there anything Americans hate more than success? "Oh noes, Big Pharma makes a profit!" Funny how we spend the other half of our time calling people "socialists".

Big pharma makes a profit for which we pay more for substandard care. THAT'S the issue. They are profiting off us, more than others, and our health care standards are still low.

If ANYTHING shouldn't be handled by the market, it's health care. I don't see, if we realize it would be a dumb idea to have privatized roads, how we can think it's a good idea to have privatized health care.

heypete

Canada has price ceilings on drugs, which keep the companies from recouping their expenses (and thus having more money to spend on developing newer drugs). The companies need to make up the difference, and so have higher prices elsewhere (like in the US).

If the US were to have price ceilings or re-imported drugs from Canada, it's likely that the pace of research would slow, the companies would move out of the US, and overall advancement would decrease. This is a Bad Thing.

I've long known this, and I'm tired of the US subsidizing drugs for the rest of the world. I'm willing to have a period of slow research if it leads to some more equitable arrangement ultimately.

grotto_man: I'm tired of the US subsidizing drugs for the rest of the world.

Doesn't work as an argument for drugs that aren't developed here but sold here under joint-dev/licensing agreements. Drugs not approved here. Drugs only approved here. And a couple other scenarios.

I always find it amusing how completely hyper-defensive Americans can get about their healthcare system. I mean, honestly, if it's so much better than the UK's, why are you so obsessive about constantly repeating that 'fact' at the top your voice like some kind of mantra? Who exactly are you trying to convince?

Every single person I know in the UK, whether in the delivering treatment or receiving treatment side of things, much prefers the UK system - with all its undeniable failings - to the US system, with its failings.

So it sounds very much as if you're shouting to convince yourselves. Good luck with that. Hope it all works out well for y'all.

grotto_man
I'm tired of the US subsidizing drugs for the rest of the world. I'm willing to have a period of slow research if it leads to some more equitable arrangement ultimately.

Go back to 2001 and tell that to Bayer when they were being blackmailed.

myalias1845: Lumoclear: "Those gifts were bribes? I thought they just liked me."

Overheard.

That's kind of sad.

I was being sarcastic!
Jesus, people.

I hear the French have the best health care in the world - use them as an ideal instead of the brits

Tirian
I always find it amusing how completely hyper-defensive Americans can get about

___________ [insert blank].


Who exactly are you trying to convince?
I believe it's just their inner Pavel Chekov, insisting that the best things must be American and vice versa.

The Gospel According to PJ O'Roarke: When buying and selling are controlled by legislation the first thing to be bought and sold are the legislators.

Drug Reps deliver tons of food and goodies everytime they come by to pitch their drug. It's crazy. It's good food too. And they are quick to leave samples.

In fact, if you are low on a perscription, as your doctor for a month's supply of samples. They will give them to you. They are aware of the cost to you and that the rep will be by in a week or two to fill their sample cabinet again. If the rep sees that the sample cabinet is full, they won't leave samples.

I felt like a jerk asking for samples the first time (my nurse friend told me to), but they explained the situation to me and said to always ask them for samples if I couldn't afford it.

If the drug company can afford dropping off samples regularly while dishing out huge high quality platters of food, they must be doing ok.

Well no wonder we are not allowed to negotiate prices under Medicare Part D, the drug companies needed that extra margin to finance all the payola.

heypete:
Researching, developing, testing, and bringing a new drug to the market is an incredibly expensive undertaking. Companies need to sell their drugs at higher price for a while to recoup that cost.

Drugs which have been around for a long time, like aspirin, are inexpensive in part because the cost as been recouped, the patents have expired, etc.

Canada has price ceilings on drugs, which keep the companies from recouping their expenses (and thus having more money to spend on developing newer drugs). The companies need to make up the difference, and so have higher prices elsewhere (like in the US).

If the US were to have price ceilings or re-imported drugs from Canada, it's likely that the pace of research would slow, the companies would move out of the US, and overall advancement would decrease. This is a Bad Thing.

/physicist
//has no connection with any drug companies
///thinks price ceilings are foolishiathink a lot of people understand researching, developing, etc costs quite a bit. However, drug companies spend a TON of money advertising to consumers and bribing doctors to use their product. And, as a former patent examiner, I can tell you that when a patent is about to run out, they slightly change the formula to make a "new and improved" drug, so that they can continue to charge consumers a higher price to pay for some R&D, but mostly to pay for the advertising.

There's an old Russian saying: "Whether it's fresh water or salt, shiat always floats to the top."

RemyDuron If ANYTHING shouldn't be handled by the market, it's health care. I don't see, if we realize it would be a dumb idea to have privatized roads, how we can think it's a good idea to have privatized health care.

I don't know. We all need food, so we better take agriculture out of private hands. And energy, that's too important to trust to those shifty capitalists. And communication, the Chinese are showing us how important it is to control the media and internet. And of course all natural resources should belong to all of the people, so mineral rights and mining should be managed from Washington too. Oh, and speaking of privatized roads, we better nationalize the railroads, airlines, and trucking industries too.

Hat Madder: RemyDuron If ANYTHING shouldn't be handled by the market, it's health care. I don't see, if we realize it would be a dumb idea to have privatized roads, how we can think it's a good idea to have privatized health care.

I don't know. We all need food, so we better take agriculture out of private hands. And energy, that's too important to trust to those shifty capitalists. And communication, the Chinese are showing us how important it is to control the media and internet. And of course all natural resources should belong to all of the people, so mineral rights and mining should be managed from Washington too. Oh, and speaking of privatized roads, we better nationalize the railroads, airlines, and trucking industries too.

The difference is, (aside from food, which is not a horridly broken industry) you don't need the others to survive.

I work for Big Pharma so I'm getting a kick out of these replies...