![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 13 of 13. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by Phil on May 2, 2002, at 7:30:02
Curious as to how others feel on this.
I think drug companies probably do a lot of research here; all of them. Any opinions (like I need to ask) : - )
It seems perfect for them.
Posted by sid on May 2, 2002, at 9:53:13
In reply to Drug company's monitering this site}Dr.B/Others, posted by Phil on May 2, 2002, at 7:30:02
I think it's great. We hear about a lot more side effects on this site than on the company's site. They need to know the crap we're going through. It probably helps them improve the meds and decide on research budgets, given people's needs and problems with current drugs. In the process, it helps them make profit if they do come up with better drugs - that's their incentive. But that's fine. They only make profits if they provide the drugs we need. And the expected future profits are their incentive to invest in research.
The fact that the info they get here is cheap is good too: it costs them less and hence, the cost of future drugs is lowered. They'll still have a profit margin due to patents, but still, lower costs are transfered, at least in part, to consumers.
We also get questions answered in the process, as well as support from each other. So everybody get something out of it. Otherwise we wouldn't be here.- sid
Posted by cmcdougall on May 2, 2002, at 14:09:26
In reply to Re: Drug company's monitering this site}Dr.B/Others » Phil, posted by sid on May 2, 2002, at 9:53:13
Maybe I'm being cynical, but I don't think the drug companies really care what we are going through. It would be wonderful if they did, but IMHO they only care about $$$$$.
I really care though...
:-)Carly
Posted by sid on May 2, 2002, at 14:19:10
In reply to Re: Drug company's monitering this site}Dr.B/Others, posted by cmcdougall on May 2, 2002, at 14:09:26
You're right. But if they do care about the money they make, then they will take our needs into account. The one company (they compete against one another) that gets THE AD of the century will cash in big time (or the cure for AIDS, or for all sorts of cancers...). Competition and profit-seeking make them see our interest (i.e., what we are willing to pay for) like their interest (i.e., what they will be able to sell us and make us use). Their intention does not matter, as long as we get results. Lower costs are passed on to the consumer not by charity, but by the company's profit-seeking behavior. The lower the price, the more they sell because more people will be willing to pay for the med, the higher the price, the less they sell. In establishing their prices, they take into account consumer behavior (i.e., responses to prices), as well as their costs, which must be at least covered. In this process, if they get info at lower cost, part of this economy is passed on to the consumer.
Posted by sid on May 2, 2002, at 14:32:09
In reply to Re: Drug company's monitering this site}Dr.B/Others, posted by cmcdougall on May 2, 2002, at 14:09:26
I don't work for the drug companies by the way, but I do economic research on R&D. Hihihi, doing research on research !
Posted by cmcdougall on May 2, 2002, at 14:51:09
In reply to Re: Drug company's monitering this site}Dr.B/Others » cmcdougall, posted by sid on May 2, 2002, at 14:32:09
Posted by Phil on May 2, 2002, at 18:26:44
In reply to Re: Drug company's monitering this site}Dr.B/Others » cmcdougall, posted by sid on May 2, 2002, at 14:19:10
I'm grateful for the meds we do have but these guys are predators just like any huge money making business.
Why can a person buy the same drug in other countries for less?
Drug reps make good money and their schmooze budget for docs is incredible. Business' need sales people but geez.
I'd like to know their true bottom line.
I think I agree with the post that said they don't really care. Some people at drug company's care and then there's upper management.
The slimey way they list their SE's is ridiculous and hasn't changed. 3% suffered some sexual side-effects such as delayed ejaculation. It's more like 89% suffer a hell of a lot more than that.
Delayed my ass. Till when, the next olympics or when you stop their drug.
On a roll, got off track
Phil
Posted by shar on May 3, 2002, at 0:37:18
In reply to Re: Oh, they cover their costs in the U.S., posted by Phil on May 2, 2002, at 18:26:44
I agree with Phil's predator position. Esp when I think about reps giving away hundreds of pills and goodies (pens, notepads, geegaws, etc....which we also pay for...) to the docs, and then make meds SO expensive. When I was employed and had insurance, I used to wonder what "poor" uninsured people did for help, if they got help at all. Now, I'm in that position....my meds are over $340 per month, I just don't see how companies can justify* that--
esp when meds are cheaper in other countries, like places in Europe where the competition is stiffer, and esp when they seem to do the bare minimum of testing (I think it is so scary to read about these studies that lasted a whole six weeks or something while we are on these for months/years...and the companies do not seem given to the idea of doing long term tests once the meds are approved).
Plus, when they have the patent for a drug, and their research costs are covered (amortized), they don't drop the cost of the med for the rest of the patent period.
[To others who don't know my history, I've done the patient assistance thing, I'm not really asking for advice here on what to do. Plus, I am not wanting to debate the issue. Just venting some frustration, really.]
I've been thinking off and on whether I should go back to drinking so I can cut my med doses more. It's very appealing to the A part of me who brightens up immediately. However, at this time I'm not going that route.
Shar
*Re justification--I know that it is a waste of breath to talk about business justifying their charges. It is whatever the market will bear, and then some if the company can get away with it. I am not so naive to believe that there is some unimpeachable standard of ethics by which companies do or "should" operate. I think this issue is another part of the "life ain't fair" school of philosophy. The lower the expectations, the better one fares.
> I'm grateful for the meds we do have but these guys are predators just like any huge money making business.
> Why can a person buy the same drug in other countries for less?
> Drug reps make good money and their schmooze budget for docs is incredible. Business' need sales people but geez.
> I'd like to know their true bottom line.
> I think I agree with the post that said they don't really care. Some people at drug company's care and then there's upper management.
> The slimey way they list their SE's is ridiculous and hasn't changed. 3% suffered some sexual side-effects such as delayed ejaculation. It's more like 89% suffer a hell of a lot more than that.
> Delayed my ass. Till when, the next olympics or when you stop their drug.
>
> On a roll, got off track
> Phil
Posted by Phil on May 3, 2002, at 7:04:52
In reply to Oh, they cover their costs...Yes indeedy..., posted by shar on May 3, 2002, at 0:37:18
If I bought a widget for $50. and sold it for $100., that was cool. When I found a vendor that would sell it to me for $35., did I drop the price? hahahaha, I don't think so.
But, if it stopped selling, sale!!!!!!!
Drug con pany's have got us by the ying-yang.
Posted by shar on May 4, 2002, at 3:38:39
In reply to Re: shar..they are like retailers, posted by Phil on May 3, 2002, at 7:04:52
>Drug company's have got us by the ying-yang.
Exactly...only I don't think I have one of those y-y things. Or, were you using the Royal "us" ?
> If I bought a widget for $50. and sold it for $100., that was cool. When I found a vendor that would sell it to me for $35., did I drop the price? hahahaha, I don't think so.
> But, if it stopped selling, sale!!!!!!!
> Drug con pany's have got us by the ying-yang.
Posted by Phil on May 4, 2002, at 6:35:53
In reply to Re: shar..they are like retailers, posted by shar on May 4, 2002, at 3:38:39
uh, okay. i think so.
Posted by Chris A. on May 5, 2002, at 0:39:23
In reply to Re: Drug company's monitering this site}Dr.B/Others, posted by cmcdougall on May 2, 2002, at 14:09:26
We were sitting with three drug reps at an educational/promotional function the other night. They got to talking about waste in their companies. We sat there dumbfounded. We always knew this to be true, but to hear the employees, (at least one was higher up), freely admit it was shocking. These were nice people, with families, etc., etc., just doing what they are paid to do. Perhaps they had had too much wine. I think most docs would rather they not "court" them and lower the prices to the patients. It gets frustrating trying to separate out the facts from the <guady> marketing. It makes me sick to my stomach. Most of the little gizmos they hand out get thrown in the trash (except for the purple pens).
Chris A.
Posted by Ritch on May 5, 2002, at 11:17:18
In reply to Re: Drug company's excesses » cmcdougall, posted by Chris A. on May 5, 2002, at 0:39:23
> We were sitting with three drug reps at an educational/promotional function the other night. They got to talking about waste in their companies. We sat there dumbfounded. We always knew this to be true, but to hear the employees, (at least one was higher up), freely admit it was shocking. These were nice people, with families, etc., etc., just doing what they are paid to do. Perhaps they had had too much wine. I think most docs would rather they not "court" them and lower the prices to the patients. It gets frustrating trying to separate out the facts from the <guady> marketing. It makes me sick to my stomach. Most of the little gizmos they hand out get thrown in the trash (except for the purple pens).
>
> Chris A.
Chris, interesting post. I often wonder how much all of the TV advertising and the army of drug reps., graphic designers, marketing experts, etc. add to the cost of a patented pill. I wonder what would happen if all the TV advertising for RX meds were stopped? I think the quality of information on the net (like this site), is far superior than marketing brochures and ads. Unfortunately, advertising seems to be nothing more than artsy-crafty misinformation.Mitch
This is the end of the thread.
Psycho-Babble Social | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.