quote:

ORIGINAL: outlier

Stan Frieberg on one of his album liner notes said:

"From Jonathan Swift to Voltaire to Al Capp the best
satire has always been born of pure outrage" (Might
not be exact but close)

Here is John Oliver on the money drug companies spend
marketing vs R&D, most of which goes to doctors. 17:12

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQZ2UeOTO3I

"While they spend nearly four billion dollars a year marketing directly to us,
they spend an estimated twenty four billion dollars a year marketing directly to doctors.
In fact one analysis in 2013 claimed that 9 top 10 drug makers spent more on marketing
than on research. Drug companies are a bit like high school boyfriends, they are much more
concerned with getting inside you than being effective once they're in there."

Reference: http://www.bbc.com/news/business-28212223
--

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


There is more than one drug company, and I am sure that yearly salaries, continuing education costs and benefits etc for competent pharmaceutical professionals who spend their lives consulting with all of the physicians in the country cant be cheap. There is a lot to discuss - side effects, contraindications and so on. I am sure there are travel costs, lodging, support staff. They give out all kinds of free samples, pay for seminars and other continuing education costs

Its likely a good thing that they spend a bundle on outreach efforts, good for the economy providing all of these jobs. Good for the patients, good for everyone.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesFIP

Without that marketing, most doctors wouldn't know if there is a newer and more effective treatment. Most doctors don't go home at night and study up on what can replace the tried and true prescriptions they've used for years.

So what solution do you have? This obviously isn't the best solution, but the alternative isn't much better.

Now obviously I'm biased. If it wasn't for aggressive marketing to doctors, my oldest wouldn't be on the meds that have kept her alive for almost 15 years, without being back in the psych ward every few years like most bipolars. Instead, with her rare variant, she wouldn't have graduated high school or college, or been a national champion in her sport. Instead she would have been a pregnant, drug addicted runaway at 16 and dead in her teens.

Would I rather they spent more money on research and doctors magically learn about new advances and start prescribing them? Sure. But until some better way to spread the news becomes available, I'm just glad that her adolescent psychiatrist did learn about a then new medication. One which the head psychiatrist of the hospital's adolescent psych ward had never heard of when she told me to give up.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MercTech

Another insidious trait is removing from the shelves over the counter remedies forcing people to see a doctor for inflated price prescriptions.

In specific, I'm thinking of treatment for conjunctivitis (pink eye) and ringworm (a fungal infection of the skin).
Pink eye is easily treated by an ophthalmic solution of silver nitrate and was an over the counter drug for over a hundred years. No longer available at chain pharmacies. The prescription ointment is much more expensive and no more effective than the traditional treatment.
Ringworm is easily treated by a sodium thiosulfate solution which is no longer available over the counter. So, you are forced to go to a doctor for a prescription for a patented ointment that costs tens if not a hundred times as much as the older remedy.

Heaven forbid someone might self medicate for something simple without paying 100+ dollars to consult with a physician.

Now, how many times do you go to a doctor be asked "What are you here for?" And the real answer is, "To pay you to use your pen for five seconds."