I hate pharmaceudical companies

[Beautifully_Broken]

seriously, i mean is it really necessiary to be so damn money hungry when you are suppsed to be in the buisness of helping ppl

was lookin around, found out the patent on vicoprofen (wich is hydrocodone w/ ibuprofen instead of tylenol) doesnt expire until 2017, which means generic wont be available till then

i mean it could be worse, they could be as expensive as when they first came out, but come on ppl! lots of ppl out there cant take tylenol!

example:the patent for ambien, which if any of u are on it know is EXPENSIVE AS HELL, (i think mine is $45, and thats after insurance) was supposed to expire this year, which meant the generics would be made, and they'd no longer have the monopoly on the formula....so they come up w/ ambien CR and send out a minion of drug reps to start pushing this on drs...van8, help me out here, maybe im totally off base, but i dont think think that ppl should have to pay $8 for a pill that costs 35cents to make

sorry...ranting after i had to pay over $200 at the pharmacy ( no,it was not all for opiates)

i just dont get it...they make billions of dollars a year, but the greed is neverending:mad:

[Paregoric Kid]

pharmaceutical companies aren't in the business of helping people, their only obligation is to make money for the stock holders. it's like any business. pills don't grow on trees. a patent is intellectual property and it deserves protections.
if you are broke look into programs that help reduce the cost or will give you your script free, a lot of drugs are covered, I don't know if vicoprofen is specifically or if you would qualify for those programs but it's worth a shot.

[HistoryofMadness]

pk is right, there are so many programs out there its crazy; those prices are mainly there to screw insurance companies, which by the way is one reason why income is lower than it should be... insurance premies...

but i will add that although i am against socialized meds, i think regulating the new iron triangle (doc-pharm-insurance) is a necessary evil that poli hacks are too chicken shit to do right now, lest they lose their campaign money...

[vaxn8]

van8, help me out here, maybe im totally off base, but i dont think think that ppl should have to pay $8 for a pill that costs 35cents to make

sorry...ranting after i had to pay over $200 at the pharmacy ( no,it was not all for opiates)

i just dont get it...they make billions of dollars a year, but the greed is neverending:mad:

Were you asking me? If you were, it has to do with the cost of the research. Research is incredibly expensive! The drug companies have to pay that cost, as well as the salaries of hundreds of scientists (and we don't work cheap), as well as make enough to find the next drug. For every drug that makes it to the market, tons fail and never get past animal or tox testing.

Now, if you would ask me if i though the pharm companies went a little far, I would say yes. They waste quite a bit overpaying their sales reps, handing out free samples and building these labs that have statues worth millions. I'll tell you about an example I worked for a while back. Now this was a little pharm co. who really had some promising drugs in their pipeline. But, they bought a building that was a little too fancy, added outrageous artwork, and you know where their first drug is? Well, due to poor management of $, it never made it through trials, they went bankrupt and all that $ is gone.

Now, I'm in purely academic research. I didn't like the way money was wasted at the big pharms and will never work for one again. But just to help you understand how expensive some of our stuff if, if I need a rat, just one plain old lab rat almost $30 each. Of course I can't do anything with one little rat, my last study actually had 402, so you can see how stuff adds up. We also have to pay rent for the little guys, $0.57/day/rat, that adds up too. I just bought a new antibody last week, 357 bucks for 200 microliters, that is 0.2 ml, not much! The instrument I use for my PCR cost over $100,000. In my case, I happen to be with a veyr good Univ, we are extremely well funded, actually the best. And we still ahve to be careful about how we spend and what we buy.

Short version: now that i'm getting way off topic. Science is expensive, and without the reserach we don't get new drugs. I get frustrated with prices too, I was on Oxycontin a while back with no coverage, and it was a grand a month, not cool at all! So I understand where you are coming from, but the companies do need to make a lot to pour back into research, but they do go overboard. Not surprising, no business is in business for the fun of it!

[WarmCyanide]

Science is expensive, and without the reserach we don't get new drugs. I get frustrated with prices too, I was on Oxycontin a while back with no coverage, and it was a grand a month, not cool at all! So I understand where you are coming from, but the companies do need to make a lot to pour back into research, but they do go overboard. Not surprising, no business is in business for the fun of it!

Well put vax, I empathize with people gettin fooked by the biggies. People bend other people over (literally and figuratively hehe)on a daily basis. but I also try to realize that big business, government, burger flippers for that matter, are all run by us humans. corrupt or honest. good or bad. Were still, for the most part, fleshy beasts on this ball. I think this is the best we can do for now. :confused:

[nick]

pharmaceutical companies aren't in the business of helping people, their only obligation is to make money for the stock holders. it's like any business. pills don't grow on trees. a patent is intellectual property and it deserves protections.
if you are broke look into programs that help reduce the cost or will give you your script free, a lot of drugs are covered, I don't know if vicoprofen is specifically or if you would qualify for those programs but it's worth a shot.
What you say is true kid,but big pharma will actively let people suffer rather than lose profits.Anti retrovirals in Africa,Russia and the Ukraine for example.
I know they are doing nothing illegal(well nothing provable) but a find a lot of their behaviour Immoral.

[antony]

how much would you pay pharmacys to create your medicine if it didn't exist, and there was no painkiller available anywhere?

god knows when I'm sick, I'd pay ten times anything they'd offer, just for relief.

[vaxn8]

how much would you pay pharmacys to create your medicine if it didn't exist, and there was no painkiller available anywhere?

god knows when I'm sick, I'd pay ten times anything they'd offer, just for relief.

Very true!! I do it all the time paying overnight shipping or stupid stuff like that. I think that's the first serious post I've seen from you Ant!:)

And to Broken: if you are in a situation where you aren't making enough to pay for your scripts, the pharm companies do have programs as mentioned earlier. Even if you don't qualify for state or govt assistance, the companies have their own programs. I highly doubt they cover narcs though!

[Beautifully_Broken]

since i hope to go into research, i hope they pay me well :)

no, i understand the research costs, its more the promotion costs that i resent

drug reps, pens, lunches, little remote control cars w/ the name written on them, i think its kinda exessive


now how much longer till i get pm-ing priledges, cause van8 i really cant wait to talk to you!

[Opiyum]

"All these facists are bound to lose." -Woody

[Paregoric Kid]

if no one buys the pill then they just wasted millions of dollars on developing a drug no one is going to take. so that's why they put so much into promoting it.

[nick]

if no one buys the pill then they just wasted millions of dollars on developing a drug no one is going to take. so that's why they put so much into promoting it.
Yes and if they promote their product many people will buy,meaning a large profit.As you pointed out ,pharma companies only responsibility is to their stock holders.

[HistoryofMadness]

all this is great, but consumers shouldn't be marketed directly by pharms, its just wrong. makes things seem too simple. we also need the sales reps out of the doc's offices... also wrong, IMO. finally, i'm sure research is expensive, but there are plenty of (in fact all) countries where things are much cheaper.

if anyone thinks we are operating in a free market, regarding pharms, they are sorely mistaken. if we were, it wouldn't be illegal to shop overseas.

anyway, i know the costs are 'legit' but a couple of simple steps and non-invasive regulations could reduce the cost of meds while keeping profits and cash flow at the same level. but we here in the US are already on the slippery slope and its all down hill from here...

[nick]

all this is great, but consumers shouldn't be marketed directly by pharms, its just wrong. makes things seem too simple. we also need the sales reps out of the doc's offices... also wrong, IMO. finally, i'm sure research is expensive, but there are plenty of (in fact all) countries where things are much cheaper.

if anyone thinks we are operating in a free market, regarding pharms, they are sorely mistaken. if we were, it wouldn't be illegal to shop overseas.

anyway, i know the costs are 'legit' but a couple of simple steps and non-invasive regulations could reduce the cost of meds while keeping profits and cash flow at the same level. but we here in the US are already on the slippery slope and its all down hill from here...
I believe pharma companies are hiring cheerleaders to induce DR's to use their product.This isn't illegel,but christ.
2.Many companies paticulaly in places like India (Ranbaxy) are being forced to stop suppyling cheap generics because big pharma wants its profits.
3.Pharma companies have been caught testing new products in third world countries.Without the
permission of the test subjects.
4.Big pharma operates in a controlled market.They control it.

[Paregoric Kid]

why shouldn't the doctors take the time to hear them out? are you saying that because some people are too retarded to accept the responsibilities of making their own medical decisions that no one should be allowed to advertise medicine?
we're not in a free market here, but considering how socialized a lot of countries are with their medical systems we are up their in freedom in that category.

[Paregoric Kid]

for example, if the makers of suboxone/subutex marketed it right there would be a lot more addicts on it. instead they were very conservative about marketing it.

[nick]

While you're bad mouthing socialised countries health care,think about this, I had 15 years free diamorphine in my left wing commie land.Think about that next time you pay for a bag of crap.
You are welcome to your "freedom" kid.It's freedom to pay if you can afford it and suffer if you can't.
P.S. Sorry if this is a bit extreme,but for obvious reasons I love the NHS.

[nick]

Think about this, I had 15 years free diamorphine in from my socialised health service.Think about that next time you pay for a bag of crap.
You are welcome to your "freedom" kid.It's freedom to pay if you can afford it and suffer if you can't.
P.S. Sorry if this is a bit extreme,but for obvious reasons I love the NHS.

[nick]

Think about this, I had 15 years free diamorphine from my socialised health service.Think about that next time you pay for a bag of crap.
You are welcome to your "freedom" kid.It's freedom to pay if you can afford it and suffer if you can't.
P.S. Sorry if this is a bit extreme,but for obvious reasons I love the NHS.

[nick]

very sorry about the posts.It's a mixture of a fucked up computer and me being an idiot.

[HistoryofMadness]

4.Big pharma operates in a controlled market.They control it.

yes, they do, with the help of the US gov... for all the conservatives and libertarians out there who support what's going on in that industry, I'm shocked that corporate welfare combined with market restrictions, with a little grey-area politics in pocket cloakroom deals, is acceptable.

I've really been disappointed in how liberal the conservatives have gotten lately. i mean, shit - nation-building? corporate welfare? internationalism? fuck me, it might as well be a social democracy from some weird nixon/wilson clusterfuck.

by the way, anybody else notice that we invaded a country that is majority shi'ite and now we're surprised that they are going to ally with Iran (another local shi'ite run gov) and in fact that is now being used as part of the policy explanation for staying in Iraq?

sorry couldn't help it.

anyway, I'm not coming back to this thread 'cause I don't like getting into poli battles here, just couldn't help it.

[nick]

yes, they do, with the help of the US gov... for all the conservatives and libertarians out there who support what's going on in that industry, I'm shocked that corporate welfare combined with market restrictions, with a little grey-area politics in pocket cloakroom deals, is acceptable.

I've really been disappointed in how liberal the conservatives have gotten lately. i mean, shit - nation-building? corporate welfare? internationalism? fuck me, it might as well be a social democracy from some weird nixon/wilson clusterfuck.

by the way, anybody else notice that we invaded a country that is majority shi'ite and now we're surprised that they are going to ally with Iran (another local shi'ite run gov) and in fact that is now being used as part of the policy explanation for staying in Iraq?

sorry couldn't help it.

anyway, I'm not coming back to this thread 'cause I don't like getting into poli battles here, just couldn't help it.
Democratisation is just a way of opening new markets.
In relation to Iraq it's interesting that much of the pre war intelligence came from the Chalbi family.Who have now been exposed as Iranian Intelligence operatives.Iran is the only country to have come out of the war on terror in front of the game.
I now just what you mean about talking politics.What can you do?At least it gives us something to argue over between hits.

[Paregoric Kid]

I'd rather pay for my own drugs than have the government force people to hand their money over to them or else, just to pay for my addiction.
democracy is shit

[vaxn8]

since i hope to go into research, i hope they pay me well :)

no, i understand the research costs, its more the promotion costs that i resent

drug reps, pens, lunches, little remote control cars w/ the name written on them, i think its kinda exessive


now how much longer till i get pm-ing priledges, cause van8 i really cant wait to talk to you!

BB- Research pay varies, but it varies by type of industry. Obviously the big pharms pay the best (depending on the level of education). Universities pay the least (also depends on degree). IMO, the U's have the freedom that makes it a great career. In a pharm company, you are basically told, we want to make drug X. Now go synthesize and analyze a million analoges of drug X and we'll force one through our pipeline.

At a U, it's research to understand, which is more important (IMO). Take the woman who just won the Lasker (the "Amercan Nobel prize). She made her discovery as a 22 year old grad student! At the time, what she was looking at, telomeres (the ends of chromosomes) didn't look very exciting to anyone. Not many places wanted to pay for that kind of research. 15 years later, the enzyme she found, telomerase is known to be involved in cancer and again and is huge as a drug target. Back when she was working at it, not one pharm company would have cared. They kind of wait for basic researches to figure out how things work, then they try to find the drug that will cure or help a situation. That's kind of a simplified explanation of the difference between U's and industry.

If I'm not mistaken, I think you can click something in my profile and e-mail me if you can't pm yet?????

Yes and if they promote their product many people will buy,meaning a large profit.As you pointed out ,pharma companies only responsibility is to their stock holders.

all this is great, but consumers shouldn't be marketed directly by pharms, its just wrong. makes things seem too simple. we also need the sales reps out of the doc's offices... also wrong, IMO. finally, i'm sure research is expensive, but there are plenty of (in fact all) countries where things are much cheaper.

if anyone thinks we are operating in a free market, regarding pharms, they are sorely mistaken. if we were, it wouldn't be illegal to shop overseas.

anyway, i know the costs are 'legit' but a couple of simple steps and non-invasive regulations could reduce the cost of meds while keeping profits and cash flow at the same level. but we here in the US are already on the slippery slope and its all down hill from here...

I'm with HoM on this. I agree the pharm companies just waste so much money. Broken mentioned this also, all the crap with the drug names on it is ridiculous and wasteful. I don't agree with the type of people they choose to sell to the docs. The big pharms will hire an MBA over an MS/Ph.D. (in a bio science) anyday! I looked into it awhile back, thougt about being a drug rep to make some cash, then I'd go back to a lab and be poor, but with my big stash from the drug co's. They're more interested in people who know how to sell, they figure they can train them to recite info about a drug. Now a pharmacologist could go in and have an intellegent conversation with a doc and the doc could really learn why drug X may benefit some of his patients. I'm not bashing drug reps here, really! I just disagree with the companies philosophy.

I believe pharma companies are hiring cheerleaders to induce DR's to use their product.This isn't illegel,but christ.
2.Many companies paticulaly in places like India (Ranbaxy) are being forced to stop suppyling cheap generics because big pharma wants its profits.
3.Pharma companies have been caught testing new products in third world countries.Without the
permission of the test subjects.
4.Big pharma operates in a controlled market.They control it.

why shouldn't the doctors take the time to hear them out? are you saying that because some people are too retarded to accept the responsibilities of making their own medical decisions that no one should be allowed to advertise medicine?
we're not in a free market here, but considering how socialized a lot of countries are with their medical systems we are up their in freedom in that category.

Here, I think both Nick and PK have great points. While I don't like how companies currently market to docs, I think they should be in the doc's offices. I'd rather see someone that truly understands the drug doing this, than the best salesman giving the info. I don't like how the reps will take the docs on crazy expensive vacations, almost bribing them to rx their drug. It doesn't feel right to me when it involves the health of a human! If I'm sick and at a doc, I want him giving me the best drug for my problem, not drug X because he was in the Bahamas with their company last week! This responsibility though should not all be left to the pharms, doc's have to keep the oath in mind here.

While you're bad mouthing socialised countries health care,think about this, I had 15 years free diamorphine in my left wing commie land.Think about that next time you pay for a bag of crap.
You are welcome to your "freedom" kid.It's freedom to pay if you can afford it and suffer if you can't.
P.S. Sorry if this is a bit extreme,but for obvious reasons I love the NHS.

yes, they do, with the help of the US gov... for all the conservatives and libertarians out there who support what's going on in that industry, I'm shocked that corporate welfare combined with market restrictions, with a little grey-area politics in pocket cloakroom deals, is acceptable.

I've really been disappointed in how liberal the conservatives have gotten lately. i mean, shit - nation-building? corporate welfare? internationalism? fuck me, it might as well be a social democracy from some weird nixon/wilson clusterfuck.

HoM, I just love reading you when you get on your politics kicks! You bring good arguments to the discussion as well as your opinions and are always so clear about what is fact and what is opinion! That said, I wonder if there isn't something inbetween these 2 extremes? Nick has some good points here and a good example of the benefit to socialized medicine. HoM also has very good points. I think the only thing that is true and known is that our system (US) is not working and a lot of people suffer and die, and I don't think that is right.

My final thought on this has to do with all the commercials for drugs (TV, radio, magazines, ect.). I don't think it's the right or moral thing for the pharms to do this. They know how we are influenced by commercials and know it will sell. Yes, they deserve to make money and be profitable, but we are becoming a society (or really we are one) that thinks there is a pill for every problem and we know which pill we want. Sniffly, get some nyquil, can't sleep grab the Ambien, a little down, run for the prozac. It's gone too far (IMO), although I think we would all agree that opiates sure cure a hell of a lof of problems! :D

One last thing! I have no comments on the war, I just don't feel like I understand enough about what is going on with all that. I know the basics, but politics is not my area!!!

[nick]

I'd rather pay for my own drugs than have the government force people to hand their money over to them or else, just to pay for my addiction.
democracy is shit
Very altruistic of you kid,tell me that when your 36 hours into your turkey.Sorry this is fair point you make.I'd rather pay for my drugs too and have control over dose and drug type,but the UK has by the better system.Free RX's and clean needles are the corner stones of Harm Reductiion.So the money spent on my free dope is a lot less than the money it would cost to put me in a jail cell or ARVS if I caught AIDS.Bottom line HR pays for itself and then some.
After saying this HR is appeasment in the war on drugs.We should be trying to end prohibition.
P.S. Amen Vaxn8,we can all agree about opiates,oHH yes.

[HistoryofMadness]

I'd rather pay for my own drugs than have the government force people to hand their money over to them or else, just to pay for my addiction.
democracy is shit

holy fuckin shit, man, we finally agreed 100%!

now, quick, let's grab a beer and talk about dope!

i especially agree that democracy is shit. for starters, we don't even come close to being a democracy, but we're already starting to suffer from the worst chracteristics of one.

secondly the next stage of gov after democracy is mob rule, which always has and always will lead to tyranny... can anyone say king george II?

me neither, and you'd better believe i'd be the first one to break out the firepower.

oh yeah, and socialized medicine couldn't be a worse idea right now in the US... pharm/med costs at an all time high (exponentially), fat ass kids at an all time high (that spend more time in front of a TV than on a bike, imagine!) and the highest population of retirees, that are on a record number of meds (at ridiculous costs) and also spent the first half of their lives high as a kite!

fuck socialized medicine, because the end result would be the complete ROBBING of the entire gneration up and coming. we need prosperity right now, not socialism.

[antony]

secondly the next stage of gov after democracy is mob rule, which always has and always will lead to tyranny... can anyone say king george II?



I can. But it was George III. George II part 2-electric boogaloo.
http://www.badmovies.org/movies/breakin/breakin5.jpg

[nick]

Sure, I agree it's too late for the US to so radically alter its health care system.I'm just glad I live on the other side of the pond.I'm not rich enough to live in the US.