The Truth About the Drug Companies

[Swede]

This isn't new,but it is always relevant.

snip

the pharmaceutical industry is not especially innovative. As hard as it is to believe, only a handful of truly important drugs have been brought to market in recent years, and they were mostly based on taxpayer-funded research at academic institutions, small biotechnology companies, or the National Institutes of Health (NIH). The great majority of "new" drugs are not new at all but merely variations of older drugs already on the market. These are called "me-too" drugs. The idea is to grab a share of an established, lucrative market by producing something very similar to a top-selling drug. For instance, we now have six statins (Mevacor, Lipitor, Zocor, Pravachol, Lescol, and the newest, Crestor) on the market to lower cholesterol, all variants of the first. As Dr. Sharon Levine, associate executive director of the Kaiser Permanente Medical Group, put it,

If I'm a manufacturer and I can change one molecule and get another twenty years of patent rights, and convince physicians to prescribe and consumers to demand the next form of Prilosec, or weekly Prozac instead of daily Prozac, just as my patent expires, then why would I be spending money on a lot less certain endeavor, which is looking for brand-new drugs?

Third, the industry is hardly a model of American free enterprise. To be sure, it is free to decide which drugs to develop (me-too drugs instead of innovative ones, for instance), and it is free to price them as high as the traffic will bear, but it is utterly dependent on government-granted monopolies—in the form of patents and Food and Drug Administration (FDA)–approved exclusive marketing rights. If it is not particularly innovative in discovering new drugs, it is highly innovative—and aggressive—in dreaming up ways to extend its monopoly rights.

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/17244

[laughingliberal]

1. "taxpayer funded research."

Americans get to pay twice. Our tax dollars fund a lot of their research. Then, we get to pay high prices they claim they have to charge to recoup 'research and development' costs. No other industrialized nation puts up with this crap. Don't we feel special?

[Warpy]

2. Some of the second and third generation drugs are far superior

to the original blockbuster drugs developed by universities using NIH grants. In addition, the drug companies do take these blockbuster drugs through the most expensive part of human testing, the large scale trials.

Then again, some of the me-too drugs have turned out to be more toxic, the most infamous example being Vioxx, a slight variation of Celebrex and a lot more toxic than the original.

However, most second generation drugs have been improvements. Lisinopril has fewer side effects than the original captopril. The same goes for Lipitor compared to Mevacor. An argument can also be made in favor of the change in formula to allow weekly or monthly administration of some drugs because patient compliance is increased with fewer pills to take.

Still, the pure research necessary to turn up blockbuster drugs is seldom worth the money poured into it. Like it or not, that research will always have to be a socialized program. For profit companies just can't afford it, although most do engage in minor programs.