Why is medicine in the US so expensive? (border, cost, dollar)

[calmdude]

Marketing Outstrips R&D Spending 2-1: Study // Pharmalot

Also notice Pharma is much more profitable than insurance companies everyone is after. Agree - neither is a charity, nor should be.

http://biz.yahoo.com/p/sum_qpmd.html

[azriverfan.]

Originally Posted by calmdude

Marketing Outstrips R&D Spending 2-1: Study // Pharmalot

1. This is someone's blog

2. The source he sites is from an irreputable journal called "The Public Library of Science" It's another hack website. It uses a name like this to sound like Pub Med or a reputable site. It also uses the term "peer review" as a buzz word to sell the lay public that it is legitimate and respectable medical website.

3. The source did not conduct its own research. It simply wrote a paper that cited other written papers and some government sources. It's the equivalent of a college student writing a thesis and supporting his opinion from published sources.

[Sagran]

Originally Posted by swagger

I'd really like to see the source of this information.

Here's a review of a book.... The Truth About the Drug Companies - The New York Review of Books

This is not a big secret.

This is from 1999 but it's a nice little easy to read chart that shows how much is spent on R&D vs COGS vs marketing & administration. Nothing much has changed. Pharmaceutical company expenses: Cost of sales, Marketing, R&D compared

[calmdude]

Originally Posted by azriverfan.

1. This is someone's blog

2. The source he sites is from an irreputable journal called "The Public Library of Science" It's another hack website. It uses a name like this to sound like Pub Med or a reputable site. It also uses the term "peer review" as a buzz word to sell the lay public that it is legitimate and respectable medical website.

3. The source did not conduct its own research. It simply wrote a paper that cited other written papers and some government sources. It's the equivalent of a college student writing a thesis and supporting his opinion from published sources.

ok .. lets us see something "credible".

[azriverfan.]

Originally Posted by Sagran

Here's a review of a book.... The Truth About the Drug Companies - The New York Review of Books

This is not a big secret.

This is from 1999 but it's a nice little easy to read chart that shows how much is spent on R&D vs COGS vs marketing and administration. Nothing much has changed. Pharmaceutical company expenses: Cost of sales, Marketing, R&D compared

Again, you provided a book written by an author who has his own biases. That's hardly evidence

The other site is laughably called the "The Consumer Project on Technology" aka another hack website trying to sound legitimate

Also, in case no one noticed, it's not the New York Times Book Review. It is some random site called The New York Review

[azriverfan.]

Originally Posted by calmdude

ok .. lets us see something "credible".

You made the claim, it's your job to support that. It's not my job to refute it.

[Moth]

I'd say its game, set, match- azriverfan.

[archineer]

Ok i'm wrong, it was years ago I read that statistic. It looks like its about 2-3 times.

[azriverfan.]

Originally Posted by archineer

Ok i'm wrong, it was years ago I read that statistic. It looks like its about 2-3 times.

Oh, okay now we are convinced

[Sagran]

Originally Posted by azriverfan.

2. The source he sites is from an irreputable journal called "The Public Library of Science" It's another hack website. It uses a name like this to sound like Pub Med or a reputable site. It also uses the term "peer review" as a buzz word to sell the lay public that it is legitimate and respectable medical website.

For those who want to judge PLoS for themselves, here's what Wiki has to say. Public Library of Science - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia As always, if you don't like Wiki, ignore what it says but use the footnotes and references for original source of the information.