4 ms·
Unsourced claim here: saw somewhere that about 75% of the cost of medication goes to advertising. We're taught to believe that it's the R&D that's the expense,
by cubicle67 16y ago
Unsourced claim here: saw somewhere that about 75% of the cost of medication goes to advertising. We're taught to believe that it's the R&D that's the expense, but it's not; it's advertising.
- moe 16y agoSources: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pharmaceutical_marketing#Economics http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pharmaceutical_marketing#Econom... http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/01/080105140107.htm http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/01/080105140107.ht...
- anamax 16y ago> Unsourced claim here: saw somewhere that about 75% of the cost of medication goes to advertising. We're taught to believe that it's the R&D that's the expense, but it's not; it's advertising. A huge fraction goes to marketing. However, that includes doctor education, free pills for poor people, and so on. Which of those do you want to give up? The amount that goes to nd-user advertising is relatively small. Since at least some of that gets folks to go to the doctor to fix something that they didn't know could be fixed, and thus improves their lives, I'm not convinced that it's bad. Then again, I think that the goal of a health system is to improve health, not control costs. (Hypocondriacs do their thing regardless of advertising.)