Replies

Thats the right idea...Seriously. Ask the right questions. This thread is supposed to start a REAL debate.

We offer some grants and all that, but largely the industry is NOT grant funded. Thats my opinion.

Quite a lot of the research that the drug companies use was done using public universities and grants so to say we do not subsidize them is not entirely accurate.

That is not entirely accurate either. Most publicly funded research is not drug development specific and provides information for open use. Research done at public facilities for the specific use of a drug company is generally funded by that company the same as if they were to use a private lab. Examine the balance sheet of a company like Merck and it will show this. The drug companies are publicly traded, if you really believe they are charging excessive prices, buy their stock and get on the gravy train. You will soon learn that although they are basically sound stocks,they do not produce exceptional return on investment and carry risk about the same as equivelant stocks in other market segments. If they were raking it in, it would show up. Enron and Worldcom demonstrated that in the US system you can make it look like you have revenue that you don't really have, but doing the reverse, hiding money that you do have is a lot harder and I don't really believe that it can be done.

"Quite a lot of the research that the drug companies use was done using public universities and grants so to say we do not subsidize them is not entirely accurate."

Trust me, consumers kick in their fair share. Consumers get the brunt of it. It is the universities that get some slack when not under a grant arrangement. You are also right that Universities also subsidize them. Also drug companies also subsidize medical school. They basically train potential medical people to start using their drugs in medical school. So when they graduate it's as natural as breathing to prescribe their drugs. One hand washes the other. They are addicted to one another.