Could you possibly be any more ignorant? Find me a hard source that refutes the ACSH's claim. This information comes directly from NIH statistics. Why do you insist on debating topics you know nothing about?
Also what percentage of "new" drugs are old drugs repackaged or modified for marketing reasons?
Modified drugs have to be proven to be uniquely different and efficacious or the FDA will not approve them. The FDA is no friend of industry. In the past 10 years more than 300 "new" drugs have been approved by the FDA. Of all the drugs in use today, more than half have been created in just the past 25 years. If you'd ever bother to do some of your own homework, and learned about the subject you choose to debate, you'd realize the pipeline is filled with lots of promising new drugs for cancer, fighting infection and managing other diseases. Profit is driving that innovation despite what you and your socialist allies would like us to believe. Kill that motive and you'll kill the golden goose. Then we can all be equally sick and equally miserable in socialist utopia.
How do you know? If you know it, why don't you provide a direct source instead of this very partisan magazine. After the wars on Serbs I lost my confidence in National Review completely (and I canceled my long time subscription).