You must be illiterate. I have said in numerous previous posts that the me-too drugs need to go by the wayside; I have also pointed out that me-too drugs are what Wall Street rewards. Drug companies are legally bound to do what is best for their shareholders. Anyway, if a me-too drug produces $750 million, then so what? Why do you really care if they come out with a me-too drug? What skin is it off your nose? You don’t have to use it. If insurance companies don’t want to pay for it and doctors don’t want to use it, it won’t make a profit, and the company will have wasted its money. It seems to stick in your craw that the pharmaceutical industry actually makes a profit.

Have you ever talked to a chronic schizophrenic who responds to Zyprexa? There are many people who take Zyprexa who would rather deal with the metabolic side effects than give up the functional improvements it affords them. And there are many people who do not gain weight or become diabetic on Zyprexa. As with all things in life, there is a balance to be struck between risks and benefits.

In the meantime, I happen to know that billions are being spent in pursuit of treatments for MS, Crohns, cancers of various sorts, Alzheimer’s, you name it. As I have noted on previous posts, new treatments are getting more scarce–requiring the companies to explore biologics, monoclonals, pharmacophenomics…these drugs will take more time and money to develop. Wall Street will have to rearrange its expectations.

As for where are all the “cures” from pharma? Since we are all going to die someday, I would say that there are no cures, only postponements. It takes a really cynical and bitter person to suggest that human beings would withhold a “cure” in order to make more money. I for one am pretty sure there is no cure for a disease like MS hidden in one of Merck’s vaults.

Do you make money at what you do? That was a rhetorical question. But in your sanctimonious harping, you imply that a pharma rep making a living is immoral. You only embrace capitalism for people and industries you approve.

America is not becoming a land of haves and have-nots. Do some basic research and you will see that more people are making more money than ever before. Anyone who wants to can make it in this country. Millions of immigrants speak to that every day. America is the best place on the planet. Americans are the most generous and most open people on earth. It is too bad that you are so wrapped up in your bitterness and cynicism that you can’t see that.

As I told Former, I am done with you. You are not interested in a different viewpoint, you just want someone to echo your jeremiads against evil pharma. Pharma will have the last laugh on you, though. Sooner or later you, or someone you love, will need us. You or someone you love will have cancer, or hepatitis, or bacterial meningitis, or MS…You will not be too proud at that point to accept what pharma has to offer. You’ll just be pissed off that they’re making money off it.

As a pharma rep, I expected, sooner or later, to see YOU devolve into name-calling. I’ve seen the same thing at CafePharma . . . if you don’t like the message, impugn the messenger.

Your message: Pharma is great, we now have a plethora of me-too drugs, each of which enriches a host of pharma reps. Additionally, YOU feel that the ills of pharma are being adequately addressed. What does this mean? When they get caught, they issue a mea culpa, pay a fine, and seek ways to not get caught in the future?

You cherrypick your arguing points. You failed to answer a previous post: where are all the cures from Pharma? Or . . . is it that CURES are self-defeating for the industry. Where would sales reps BE if diseases were actually cured?

Perhaps I have a sour view of America (as it is now). Possibly that’s because I’ve experienced more and have a broader basis for comparison. I never thought of myself as a liberal or a conservative; I’ve embraced capitalism. What I don’t accept, in moving toward a ‘better America’ is a class system of ‘haves’, ‘have-mores’ and ‘have-nothings.’ In the past decades I’ve seen the rise of UNBRIDLED capitalism, where ‘everything goes’ as long as I get mine.

Last graph above you indicate that ‘change’ somehow automatically equals ‘improvement’ and ‘accomplishment.’ Yet, you have formerly bemoaned the expense associated with prolonging the life of your mother-in-law? Just because scientists/researchers have found artificial means to prolong life–CHANGE–does not necessarily mean such CHANGE is a good thing, does it?

Zyprexa brought us CHANGE. I imagine those sales reps whose paychecks were enhanced by selling this CHANGE saw Zyprexa as an improvement, an accomplishment. On the other hand, those patients who now face a LIFETIME coping with diabetes probably have a different opinion.

Same with you Former. You do what you accuse me of doing. I think it is your ego that is hurt because someone on this site has the nerve to challenge you, the penitent oracle from the industry.

If what you two want is to talk only to people who agree with you, you are no different than CafePharma. As far as I can tell from reading what you have to say, you never back away an inch from your righteous indignation. As others have noted, I am one of the few here who seems to have some sense of perspective and balance. I see the good and the bad. I believe the bad is being addressed appropriately; I fear that knee-jerk pharma-haters like you will succeed in tearing down an industry that has accomplished far more good than ill.

Both of you seem to hate many things about America. You only see the bad, not the good. Everything is awful to you. I’m sure that your sour view of life extends beyond to pharma to many others things. I suspect that in the long run, it is not I who will be viewed as in-credible, but you; because in refusing to acknowledge improvement, change and accomplishment, you become Cassandras.

With such a breadth and depth of knowledge, I’m surprised (1) that you’re not a CEO of a major pharmaceutical; and (2) that you have time to spend proselytizing to the readers here, some of whom disagree with you. I expect you would find the community at CafePharma more welcoming and more aligned with your views. Their contributors embrace a more colorful vernacular, and discuss much weightier issues than you are likely to find here.

Your tendency to project your ego onto everyone and everything makes it difficult to take anything you say seriously. Why do you feel the need to do that? Just pay attention to what is being said here and leave your ego out of it. You might actually learn more.

Melody and I are not being self righteous. We are simply stating that the Pharma industry should be made to stand up to higher standards.

Does your DM know that you are spending all your time here? Hope you are not using the company computer, because you do know that IT can track it…

It’s almost the end of the month, hope you make your budget…

As for consulting fees…I have spoken about this on this site before. 99% of the physicians out there don’t speak for pharma; of those that do, most don’t do it very often. The truth is that most physicians aren’t very good speakers and aren’t candidates for the kind of speaking tours that a very few docs make. Those that do actually hurt the reps who have them in their territories, because while they are great advocates for a drug, they aren’t in the office enough to prescribe it. That aside, your average speaker program can be informative and helpful to doctors who choose to attend, as the discussion often veers completely away from the medication at issue and into other challenges and issues facing the physicians. But of course, you have never attended one of these–so you really aren’t competent to comment on them.

As for ad boards and other “consulting” events. For most companies participating in PhARMA, these events are largely a thing of the past. My company seldom has these anymore, precisely because the publicity was so bad. But again, the number of physicians invited to attend one of these was small compared to the number of physicians in the country. Out of my region, encompassing several states and thousands and thousands of doctors, one or two would be invited. Most of those were so-called “thought leaders,” academics and medical directors. That’s a lot of doctors NOT being able to buy cars with so-called consulting fees.

You attempt to take the example of a few physicians and generalize it to the whole industry. THAT is disingenuous. Not only that, but you excoriate the pharmaceutical industry for engaging in sales and marketing techniques that every single industry in the country utilizes. What you don’t, or won’t, see is that while there are abuses (and I think we do a pretty good job of highlighting them), we also benefit from this process.

I will again hold up the example of the SSRIs: Despite what some fear-mongerers on this site claim, millions of people have benefitted from SSRIs. They are much safer and far better-tolerated than tricyclic anti-depressants. Yet when Prozac came out, doctors were skeptical and reluctant to try it. They had to be SOLD on the product. If you have ever taken a tri-cyclic and compared it to an SSRI, you would know that an SSRI is far better. And you can take grams of an SSRI and wake up in the morning. A couple of tablets extra of a tri-cyclic and…good-bye.

So what is Lilly made billions off Prozac? Good for them. “Lilly” consists of tens of thousands of individuals who are able to buy houses, cars, food, clothes and other things for their families. “Lilly” consists of millions of shareholders who get paid dividends and will profit from the sale of Lilly stock. That is how America works. And it is a beautiful, beautiful thing.

I agree if you add “yet” to the end of the sentence. I don’t think it is a coincidence that the new IP laws in India came into being just at the time when many of their industries (ours included) were shifting into an R&D mode and so they wanted protection for their own inventions. I agree that we don’t need another statin, but what an excellent way to get your feet wet. They know that it will be decades before they have all the necessary skills and experience, but they are incredibly patient. By mid-century we should expect to see and Indian company well established in the top-10 (and given thei access to capital I would not be surprised to see an Indian based major acquisition before then).

As far as the Indian government goes, even the Indian companies have complained bitterly that price controls are damagin their ability to innovate. It’s their industry’s ability to manufacture finished goods cheaply and distribute them efficiently that makes the industry profitable.

Having consulted for a global trade association dealing with Indian, among other Asian countries, I hold to my claim that the India is not a good pharma market.

I agree, we are very concerned, and we should be at the moment. We should spend more time getting our own house in order.

As for exploiting the third world poor. My comments were strictly related to AIDS, but that isn’t clear in my post. I was thinking about MSF being able to buy the cheaper versions of AIDS drugs to deliver FREE health care to the worlds poor in conflicted areas. I was also thinking about the latest move by some Pharma’s in recognizing the seriousness of the problem, to actually partner with some of these countries and allow them to produce generic drugs. This allows them to employ local citizens as long as the drugs do not flow back into developed markets. So, I can actually offer a tip of my hat when it is needed…

Outside of the Box: Your comments are quite astute about India.

We here in the US need to open our minds and look around us, they have one billion people… Somehow China and India are doing a fairly good job of educating, or at least providing access to education for their people. They will not be able to employ them all, I think we see that already…