Drug Pushers Let's show them we're no dopes! by Molly Rush, PUSH                                                                                                                               HOME

Aricept, the highly marketed drug for alzheimers, was found by the largest and longest study carried out in the UK to have NO benefit. [British Medical Journal]. Doctor  Ken Thompson of the Pittsburgh chapter of Physicians for a National Health Program has this to say:

"...fundamentally the problem as I see it is that the pharmaceutical industry has managed to capitalize on our social belief that at any moment there is likely to be a better pill, or even a cure. This ties in with the immense buying power of the public to create a capitalist dream the perfect business model, shored up by an extraordinary protection from competition...so good that even if the meds don't really work work, our desire for them to work is so great that it's easy for the marketers to manipulate us, to see all new medications, even ones if in ffective, as a great step forward and worth prescribing, buying and taking.

It's great if we have a great new medication but we sure do have to pay for and consume a lot of garbage in the meantime..while imagining that we are getting something good..."

Marcia Angell, author of the Random House book "Out of Bounds: Rising Prescription Drug Prices for Seniors" describes the industry as saying, "You get what you pay for."  We're  now paying  $200 billion a year and rising. That's half of total worlwide expenditures for precription medications. And U.S. prescription drugs cost much more.

In 2002 the fifty drugs most used by seniors with no insurance cost nearly $1500 for a year's supply. Those with insurance are also paying more out of pocket . Workers with insurance are paying more or losing health benefits altogether. Many have to choose between their meds and food or home heating, often taking less than prescribed or nothing.

In 2002 the ten biggest drug companies in the Fortune 500 had combined profits of $35.9 billion, more than all the other 490 corporations  $33.9 billion put together. In 2001 Bristol-Myers' then-CEO made over $150 million, including over $76 million in stock options.

That corporation, along with nearly every big global drug company in the industry is now being investigated in a government crackdown of their marketing techniques. You've seen all the misleading ads on TV, but what about Schering-Plough that sent unsolicited checks for $10,000 to doctors for a 'consulting' agreement to prescribe their medicines.

In addition to bribery, companies collude with generic companies to keep lower-priced generics off the market.

The industry argues that research and development account for much of their high costs. But that amounted to just 14% of sales in 2000. The lion's share is spent to make insignificant changes to gain a new patent as the old one runs out.

Schering-Plough's Claratin was replaced by the virtually identical Clarinex. Claritin is now sold over the counter at a much lover cost. Of 78 drugs approved by the FDA in 2002 only seven were classified by the FDA as improvements over the old "me-too"; drug.

As for real innovations, the big pharmaceuticals rely on government, university and small bio-tech company research. And instead of being a free-market success story, it lives off government research and monopoly rights.

They pour money into lobbying and political campaigns. Is it any wonder that the new Medicare prescription drug bill forbids the government from negotiating lower prices? Or why they gain multiple tax breaks that nearly guarantee a profit?

Since government is the major purchaser of drugs, Angell argues that drugs should be considered a public utility.

The one thing, she writes, that legislators need more than campaign contributions is votes. That means an aroused and determined public.

Seniors should not have to take a bus to Canada. They need to forcefully demand change. The best solution is a national healthcare program such as House Bill 676.

Sources: New York Review of Books  7-15-04

New York Times  6-27-04