Uh! Why do meds cost so much?!?!?!

[JazzysMom]

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote><i>Originally posted by: <b>summer732</b></i>

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote><i>Originally posted by: <b>KrazyKat</b></i>





What brasses me off even more, is that for most people, high cholesterol and heart disease are preventable diseased, the US citizens who pay through the nose for these cholesterol drugs have most of the time dug their own graves by shovelling fatty foods down their throats all day and sittin on their too fat a$$es in between feeds - yet billions of dollars a year is spent trying to save their sad self destructive a$$es.





Okay have to make a statement about this comment. My father is under 200 pounds, eats healthy (soups, salad, lean meat) and exercises regularly. His cholesterol is through the roof. Lipitor saved him. High cholesterol runs in the family. I have high cholesterol due to immunosuppressant drugs post transplant. So making a statement that you have above and generalizing is very stereotypical. I understand that other diseases get way more attention then we do and I would love to see that change. The new meds that came out for CF before I had my transplant were minimal and did very little to help my situation with CF. But the reality is that these other drugs are needed as well. Not all people with high cholesterol stuff their faces on end and sit around doing nothing. My dad is on the treadmill at 5:30 AM every morning for his hour and a half work out before work. So as angry as you get, think before you speak. And thanks to the pharmaceutical company for developing Lipitor so that my father can still be here and that I can control my cholestrol from my immunosuppressant drugs (but I suppose that is my fault too huh).



Sorry guys. Couldn't let this one go!</end quote></div>


THUS she said for MOST people....she didnt say all!

 

[summer732]

I understand that. But simply because MOST people do that to themselves, why should the people that don't purposely do that to themselves suffer? We would be having the same issue that we have with CF if the pharmaceutical companies said, "Well MOST people in the US cause their own problems with high cholesterol so we aren't going to make a drug for that becuase it is self induced". Then where would the people who didn't cause it themselves be? Right where we are. And that is unfair too. so as I understand the issue and the frustration and share it as well, I kind of felt that the statement was harsh. I am just putting my opinion out there (most of my frustration regarding that statement is coming from my prednisone dose, I went off on my mother yesterday because I was missing a pair of socks). So usually I wouldn't have even said anything. but hey, that's prednisone for you. Little things annoy me right now and my big mouth doesn't stay shut.

 

[summer732]

I understand that. But simply because MOST people do that to themselves, why should the people that don't purposely do that to themselves suffer? We would be having the same issue that we have with CF if the pharmaceutical companies said, "Well MOST people in the US cause their own problems with high cholesterol so we aren't going to make a drug for that becuase it is self induced". Then where would the people who didn't cause it themselves be? Right where we are. And that is unfair too. so as I understand the issue and the frustration and share it as well, I kind of felt that the statement was harsh. I am just putting my opinion out there (most of my frustration regarding that statement is coming from my prednisone dose, I went off on my mother yesterday because I was missing a pair of socks). So usually I wouldn't have even said anything. but hey, that's prednisone for you. Little things annoy me right now and my big mouth doesn't stay shut.

 

[summer732]

I understand that. But simply because MOST people do that to themselves, why should the people that don't purposely do that to themselves suffer? We would be having the same issue that we have with CF if the pharmaceutical companies said, "Well MOST people in the US cause their own problems with high cholesterol so we aren't going to make a drug for that becuase it is self induced". Then where would the people who didn't cause it themselves be? Right where we are. And that is unfair too. so as I understand the issue and the frustration and share it as well, I kind of felt that the statement was harsh. I am just putting my opinion out there (most of my frustration regarding that statement is coming from my prednisone dose, I went off on my mother yesterday because I was missing a pair of socks). So usually I wouldn't have even said anything. but hey, that's prednisone for you. Little things annoy me right now and my big mouth doesn't stay shut.

 

[KrazyKat]

Thanks for trying Melissa, but it would appear the subtleties of my writing were overlooked.

Margaret, as melissa tried to point out, i was only referring to those people with high cholesterol purely as a result of their own LIFESTYLE CHOICES......i was never referring to those people with high cholesterol for other reasons out of their control.

However, even though you missed that very important point....Lipitor, Lipex etc (there are numerous others) ALL do the same thing and they all do it very well, therefore I just don't see the need for drug companies to continue developing more of the same...when CF could really use some new drugs.

I also get angry (again only for people who are fat and have high cholestorol because of their lifestyle choices) when instead of treating the disease (bad attitude, laziness, addiction to bad food) we spend billions of dollars to fix their symptoms instead.

My ex had high cholestorol, so bad he was a walking heart attack.....so the doctor prescribed him Lipex, one a day, cool, worked like a charm. But did the doctor say even one word about changing his lifestyle to bring down his cholesterol naturally??? nope, not a word. I surfed the web looking for good foods for him to be eating, tried to encourage him to exercise with me and to give up smoking.

But guess what? The Lipex worked so well he now has normal cholesterol, still eats takeaways for dinner most nights, drinks lots of beer, smokes cigarettes and sits on his a$$ watching TV most of the time. Hence he's now my ex.

They should help themselves like we have to. Insted of throwing billions of dollars at them and deliberately NOT encouraging them to change....this guarantees every drug company with a Lipex or a Lipitor a constant hefty source of income.

I'm glad your dad is ok and i'm sorry for both of you that you have been given this problem with your cholesterol, obviously neither of you did anything to deserve it, so for both of you, I too thank god for good cholesterol drugs. Although any one of the million would suffice.

 

[KrazyKat]

Thanks for trying Melissa, but it would appear the subtleties of my writing were overlooked.

Margaret, as melissa tried to point out, i was only referring to those people with high cholesterol purely as a result of their own LIFESTYLE CHOICES......i was never referring to those people with high cholesterol for other reasons out of their control.

However, even though you missed that very important point....Lipitor, Lipex etc (there are numerous others) ALL do the same thing and they all do it very well, therefore I just don't see the need for drug companies to continue developing more of the same...when CF could really use some new drugs.

I also get angry (again only for people who are fat and have high cholestorol because of their lifestyle choices) when instead of treating the disease (bad attitude, laziness, addiction to bad food) we spend billions of dollars to fix their symptoms instead.

My ex had high cholestorol, so bad he was a walking heart attack.....so the doctor prescribed him Lipex, one a day, cool, worked like a charm. But did the doctor say even one word about changing his lifestyle to bring down his cholesterol naturally??? nope, not a word. I surfed the web looking for good foods for him to be eating, tried to encourage him to exercise with me and to give up smoking.

But guess what? The Lipex worked so well he now has normal cholesterol, still eats takeaways for dinner most nights, drinks lots of beer, smokes cigarettes and sits on his a$$ watching TV most of the time. Hence he's now my ex.

They should help themselves like we have to. Insted of throwing billions of dollars at them and deliberately NOT encouraging them to change....this guarantees every drug company with a Lipex or a Lipitor a constant hefty source of income.

I'm glad your dad is ok and i'm sorry for both of you that you have been given this problem with your cholesterol, obviously neither of you did anything to deserve it, so for both of you, I too thank god for good cholesterol drugs. Although any one of the million would suffice.

 

[KrazyKat]

Thanks for trying Melissa, but it would appear the subtleties of my writing were overlooked.

Margaret, as melissa tried to point out, i was only referring to those people with high cholesterol purely as a result of their own LIFESTYLE CHOICES......i was never referring to those people with high cholesterol for other reasons out of their control.

However, even though you missed that very important point....Lipitor, Lipex etc (there are numerous others) ALL do the same thing and they all do it very well, therefore I just don't see the need for drug companies to continue developing more of the same...when CF could really use some new drugs.

I also get angry (again only for people who are fat and have high cholestorol because of their lifestyle choices) when instead of treating the disease (bad attitude, laziness, addiction to bad food) we spend billions of dollars to fix their symptoms instead.

My ex had high cholestorol, so bad he was a walking heart attack.....so the doctor prescribed him Lipex, one a day, cool, worked like a charm. But did the doctor say even one word about changing his lifestyle to bring down his cholesterol naturally??? nope, not a word. I surfed the web looking for good foods for him to be eating, tried to encourage him to exercise with me and to give up smoking.

But guess what? The Lipex worked so well he now has normal cholesterol, still eats takeaways for dinner most nights, drinks lots of beer, smokes cigarettes and sits on his a$$ watching TV most of the time. Hence he's now my ex.

They should help themselves like we have to. Insted of throwing billions of dollars at them and deliberately NOT encouraging them to change....this guarantees every drug company with a Lipex or a Lipitor a constant hefty source of income.

I'm glad your dad is ok and i'm sorry for both of you that you have been given this problem with your cholesterol, obviously neither of you did anything to deserve it, so for both of you, I too thank god for good cholesterol drugs. Although any one of the million would suffice.

 

[DietRootBeer]

As a healthcare worker I must chime in....

I agree that MOST obesity,diabetes, and high cholesterol is SELF-INFLICTED. But obesity in MY OPINION is a disease...people who eat themselves to death have issues. Some people poisen themselves with alcohol, cigarettes, food, anger, etc...
I think it is a way to numb whatever pain they are going through at the time. I agree it is frustrating that pharmaceutical companies are focusing on obesity issues but they want to make money and since something like 50% of americans are overweight this is where the $$ is unfortunately.

I have seen collegues go on disability from hurting their backs from having to transfer obese patients in the hospital...it is a real problem for healthcare workers when we have to move/transfer/support large patients.

Most CFers can have any food they want and never have to worry about calories/fat content but the rest of us have to watch very closely what we intake and being surrounded by bad choices it is not always easy.

PHEW! All this to say that obesity is not neccesarilly a choice- It can be multi-faceted and it is not just lazy, ignorant people who get over weight. Choice is involved but most people do not wake up in the morning and say ' Today I am going to work on becoming obese'. Extra weight leads to joint pain and loss of energy which leads to less motivation and depression which is comforted by eating blah blah blah. Vicious cycle really.

Mummy to 2 boys -1 w/cf + 1 w/o cf + RN in training<img src="i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif" border="0">

 

[DietRootBeer]

As a healthcare worker I must chime in....

I agree that MOST obesity,diabetes, and high cholesterol is SELF-INFLICTED. But obesity in MY OPINION is a disease...people who eat themselves to death have issues. Some people poisen themselves with alcohol, cigarettes, food, anger, etc...
I think it is a way to numb whatever pain they are going through at the time. I agree it is frustrating that pharmaceutical companies are focusing on obesity issues but they want to make money and since something like 50% of americans are overweight this is where the $$ is unfortunately.

I have seen collegues go on disability from hurting their backs from having to transfer obese patients in the hospital...it is a real problem for healthcare workers when we have to move/transfer/support large patients.

Most CFers can have any food they want and never have to worry about calories/fat content but the rest of us have to watch very closely what we intake and being surrounded by bad choices it is not always easy.

PHEW! All this to say that obesity is not neccesarilly a choice- It can be multi-faceted and it is not just lazy, ignorant people who get over weight. Choice is involved but most people do not wake up in the morning and say ' Today I am going to work on becoming obese'. Extra weight leads to joint pain and loss of energy which leads to less motivation and depression which is comforted by eating blah blah blah. Vicious cycle really.

Mummy to 2 boys -1 w/cf + 1 w/o cf + RN in training<img src="i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif" border="0">

 

[DietRootBeer]

As a healthcare worker I must chime in....

I agree that MOST obesity,diabetes, and high cholesterol is SELF-INFLICTED. But obesity in MY OPINION is a disease...people who eat themselves to death have issues. Some people poisen themselves with alcohol, cigarettes, food, anger, etc...
I think it is a way to numb whatever pain they are going through at the time. I agree it is frustrating that pharmaceutical companies are focusing on obesity issues but they want to make money and since something like 50% of americans are overweight this is where the $$ is unfortunately.

I have seen collegues go on disability from hurting their backs from having to transfer obese patients in the hospital...it is a real problem for healthcare workers when we have to move/transfer/support large patients.

Most CFers can have any food they want and never have to worry about calories/fat content but the rest of us have to watch very closely what we intake and being surrounded by bad choices it is not always easy.

PHEW! All this to say that obesity is not neccesarilly a choice- It can be multi-faceted and it is not just lazy, ignorant people who get over weight. Choice is involved but most people do not wake up in the morning and say ' Today I am going to work on becoming obese'. Extra weight leads to joint pain and loss of energy which leads to less motivation and depression which is comforted by eating blah blah blah. Vicious cycle really.

Mummy to 2 boys -1 w/cf + 1 w/o cf + RN in training<img src="i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif" border="0">

 

[littledebbie]

I have to say I understand about re-couping costs and making a profit. However, I find having the pharma rep at Dr.'s apt's REALLY EXTREMELY tacky. I do NOT like the idea my Dr. is being influenced in what approach to take with medications by a pharma rep. And while I understand that's they serve an important purpose as far as helping keep Dr's up and educated on new drugs...do it elsewhere..not during my time with my doc. Not in my face. I like to think my Dr. is up to date and educated etc. but with the rep right there it makes it feel like he's being influenced. I prefer to think I'm the most influential person/aspect when it comes to chosing the right meds for me. Also, when I asked my doc why HS wasn't talked about as much as pulmozyme when it does pretty much the same thiing..he said basically - there's no drug company standing behind the HS making profit.
I would like to see pharma companies encouraged to fing more natural choices for us as well...I don't know excatly how but maybe through grants or trying to find a way for them to get rights to whatever they could find that would work and still get a profit. Our gov't needs to think more outside the box when it comes to this issue not just private vs. a socialized health care system....come on guys there's got to be more options that that.... And there has to be a way to utilize "natural" remedies to treat some things... there's too much evidence out there showing some of this stuff works. Why can't we get that stuff tested and regulated for specific uses and allow the pharma to profit as well as us patients? And I think it would do the world a lot of good to use less drugs....maybe cut down on the super bugs caused by misuse of antibiotocs.

 

[littledebbie]

I have to say I understand about re-couping costs and making a profit. However, I find having the pharma rep at Dr.'s apt's REALLY EXTREMELY tacky. I do NOT like the idea my Dr. is being influenced in what approach to take with medications by a pharma rep. And while I understand that's they serve an important purpose as far as helping keep Dr's up and educated on new drugs...do it elsewhere..not during my time with my doc. Not in my face. I like to think my Dr. is up to date and educated etc. but with the rep right there it makes it feel like he's being influenced. I prefer to think I'm the most influential person/aspect when it comes to chosing the right meds for me. Also, when I asked my doc why HS wasn't talked about as much as pulmozyme when it does pretty much the same thiing..he said basically - there's no drug company standing behind the HS making profit.
I would like to see pharma companies encouraged to fing more natural choices for us as well...I don't know excatly how but maybe through grants or trying to find a way for them to get rights to whatever they could find that would work and still get a profit. Our gov't needs to think more outside the box when it comes to this issue not just private vs. a socialized health care system....come on guys there's got to be more options that that.... And there has to be a way to utilize "natural" remedies to treat some things... there's too much evidence out there showing some of this stuff works. Why can't we get that stuff tested and regulated for specific uses and allow the pharma to profit as well as us patients? And I think it would do the world a lot of good to use less drugs....maybe cut down on the super bugs caused by misuse of antibiotocs.

 

[littledebbie]

I have to say I understand about re-couping costs and making a profit. However, I find having the pharma rep at Dr.'s apt's REALLY EXTREMELY tacky. I do NOT like the idea my Dr. is being influenced in what approach to take with medications by a pharma rep. And while I understand that's they serve an important purpose as far as helping keep Dr's up and educated on new drugs...do it elsewhere..not during my time with my doc. Not in my face. I like to think my Dr. is up to date and educated etc. but with the rep right there it makes it feel like he's being influenced. I prefer to think I'm the most influential person/aspect when it comes to chosing the right meds for me. Also, when I asked my doc why HS wasn't talked about as much as pulmozyme when it does pretty much the same thiing..he said basically - there's no drug company standing behind the HS making profit.
I would like to see pharma companies encouraged to fing more natural choices for us as well...I don't know excatly how but maybe through grants or trying to find a way for them to get rights to whatever they could find that would work and still get a profit. Our gov't needs to think more outside the box when it comes to this issue not just private vs. a socialized health care system....come on guys there's got to be more options that that.... And there has to be a way to utilize "natural" remedies to treat some things... there's too much evidence out there showing some of this stuff works. Why can't we get that stuff tested and regulated for specific uses and allow the pharma to profit as well as us patients? And I think it would do the world a lot of good to use less drugs....maybe cut down on the super bugs caused by misuse of antibiotocs.

 

[JazzysMom]

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote><i>Originally posted by: <b>summer732</b></i>

I understand that. But simply because MOST people do that to themselves, why should the people that don't purposely do that to themselves suffer? We would be having the same issue that we have with CF if the pharmaceutical companies said, "Well MOST people in the US cause their own problems with high cholesterol so we aren't going to make a drug for that becuase it is self induced". Then where would the people who didn't cause it themselves be? Right where we are. And that is unfair too. so as I understand the issue and the frustration and share it as well, I kind of felt that the statement was harsh. I am just putting my opinion out there (most of my frustration regarding that statement is coming from my prednisone dose, I went off on my mother yesterday because I was missing a pair of socks). So usually I wouldn't have even said anything. but hey, that's prednisone for you. Little things annoy me right now and my big mouth doesn't stay shut.</end quote></div>

Understood now all the way around.....

 

[JazzysMom]

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote><i>Originally posted by: <b>summer732</b></i>

I understand that. But simply because MOST people do that to themselves, why should the people that don't purposely do that to themselves suffer? We would be having the same issue that we have with CF if the pharmaceutical companies said, "Well MOST people in the US cause their own problems with high cholesterol so we aren't going to make a drug for that becuase it is self induced". Then where would the people who didn't cause it themselves be? Right where we are. And that is unfair too. so as I understand the issue and the frustration and share it as well, I kind of felt that the statement was harsh. I am just putting my opinion out there (most of my frustration regarding that statement is coming from my prednisone dose, I went off on my mother yesterday because I was missing a pair of socks). So usually I wouldn't have even said anything. but hey, that's prednisone for you. Little things annoy me right now and my big mouth doesn't stay shut.</end quote></div>

Understood now all the way around.....

 

[JazzysMom]

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote><i>Originally posted by: <b>summer732</b></i>

I understand that. But simply because MOST people do that to themselves, why should the people that don't purposely do that to themselves suffer? We would be having the same issue that we have with CF if the pharmaceutical companies said, "Well MOST people in the US cause their own problems with high cholesterol so we aren't going to make a drug for that becuase it is self induced". Then where would the people who didn't cause it themselves be? Right where we are. And that is unfair too. so as I understand the issue and the frustration and share it as well, I kind of felt that the statement was harsh. I am just putting my opinion out there (most of my frustration regarding that statement is coming from my prednisone dose, I went off on my mother yesterday because I was missing a pair of socks). So usually I wouldn't have even said anything. but hey, that's prednisone for you. Little things annoy me right now and my big mouth doesn't stay shut.</end quote></div>

Understood now all the way around.....

 

[NoExcuses]

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote><i>Originally posted by: <b>littledebbie</b></i>

I have to say I understand about re-couping costs and making a profit. However, I find having the pharma rep at Dr.'s apt's REALLY EXTREMELY tacky. I do NOT like the idea my Dr. is being influenced in what approach to take with medications by a pharma rep. And while I understand that's they serve an important purpose as far as helping keep Dr's up and educated on new drugs...do it elsewhere..not during my time with my doc. Not in my face. I like to think my Dr. is up to date and educated etc. but with the rep right there it makes it feel like he's being influenced. I prefer to think I'm the most influential person/aspect when it comes to chosing the right meds for me. Also, when I asked my doc why HS wasn't talked about as much as pulmozyme when it does pretty much the same thiing..he said basically - there's no drug company standing behind the HS making profit.

I would like to see pharma companies encouraged to fing more natural choices for us as well...I don't know excatly how but maybe through grants or trying to find a way for them to get rights to whatever they could find that would work and still get a profit. Our gov't needs to think more outside the box when it comes to this issue not just private vs. a socialized health care system....come on guys there's got to be more options that that.... And there has to be a way to utilize "natural" remedies to treat some things... there's too much evidence out there showing some of this stuff works. Why can't we get that stuff tested and regulated for specific uses and allow the pharma to profit as well as us patients? And I think it would do the world a lot of good to use less drugs....maybe cut down on the super bugs caused by misuse of antibiotocs.</end quote></div>


many docs do see reps outside of patient hours. that's your doc's fault, not the pharma reps. reps come when the docs tell them to. many docs want to spend more time with patients so they request that reps come early in the morning before patients start, during lunch, or at the end of the day when patients are gone.

and some docs don't even see reps because they keep up to date on meds themselves.

your blame should be on your doc. not on the reps.

 

[NoExcuses]

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote><i>Originally posted by: <b>littledebbie</b></i>

I have to say I understand about re-couping costs and making a profit. However, I find having the pharma rep at Dr.'s apt's REALLY EXTREMELY tacky. I do NOT like the idea my Dr. is being influenced in what approach to take with medications by a pharma rep. And while I understand that's they serve an important purpose as far as helping keep Dr's up and educated on new drugs...do it elsewhere..not during my time with my doc. Not in my face. I like to think my Dr. is up to date and educated etc. but with the rep right there it makes it feel like he's being influenced. I prefer to think I'm the most influential person/aspect when it comes to chosing the right meds for me. Also, when I asked my doc why HS wasn't talked about as much as pulmozyme when it does pretty much the same thiing..he said basically - there's no drug company standing behind the HS making profit.

I would like to see pharma companies encouraged to fing more natural choices for us as well...I don't know excatly how but maybe through grants or trying to find a way for them to get rights to whatever they could find that would work and still get a profit. Our gov't needs to think more outside the box when it comes to this issue not just private vs. a socialized health care system....come on guys there's got to be more options that that.... And there has to be a way to utilize "natural" remedies to treat some things... there's too much evidence out there showing some of this stuff works. Why can't we get that stuff tested and regulated for specific uses and allow the pharma to profit as well as us patients? And I think it would do the world a lot of good to use less drugs....maybe cut down on the super bugs caused by misuse of antibiotocs.</end quote></div>


many docs do see reps outside of patient hours. that's your doc's fault, not the pharma reps. reps come when the docs tell them to. many docs want to spend more time with patients so they request that reps come early in the morning before patients start, during lunch, or at the end of the day when patients are gone.

and some docs don't even see reps because they keep up to date on meds themselves.

your blame should be on your doc. not on the reps.

 

[NoExcuses]

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote><i>Originally posted by: <b>littledebbie</b></i>

I have to say I understand about re-couping costs and making a profit. However, I find having the pharma rep at Dr.'s apt's REALLY EXTREMELY tacky. I do NOT like the idea my Dr. is being influenced in what approach to take with medications by a pharma rep. And while I understand that's they serve an important purpose as far as helping keep Dr's up and educated on new drugs...do it elsewhere..not during my time with my doc. Not in my face. I like to think my Dr. is up to date and educated etc. but with the rep right there it makes it feel like he's being influenced. I prefer to think I'm the most influential person/aspect when it comes to chosing the right meds for me. Also, when I asked my doc why HS wasn't talked about as much as pulmozyme when it does pretty much the same thiing..he said basically - there's no drug company standing behind the HS making profit.

I would like to see pharma companies encouraged to fing more natural choices for us as well...I don't know excatly how but maybe through grants or trying to find a way for them to get rights to whatever they could find that would work and still get a profit. Our gov't needs to think more outside the box when it comes to this issue not just private vs. a socialized health care system....come on guys there's got to be more options that that.... And there has to be a way to utilize "natural" remedies to treat some things... there's too much evidence out there showing some of this stuff works. Why can't we get that stuff tested and regulated for specific uses and allow the pharma to profit as well as us patients? And I think it would do the world a lot of good to use less drugs....maybe cut down on the super bugs caused by misuse of antibiotocs.</end quote></div>


many docs do see reps outside of patient hours. that's your doc's fault, not the pharma reps. reps come when the docs tell them to. many docs want to spend more time with patients so they request that reps come early in the morning before patients start, during lunch, or at the end of the day when patients are gone.

and some docs don't even see reps because they keep up to date on meds themselves.

your blame should be on your doc. not on the reps.

 

[sam123]

Meds cost so much in the US, because drug companies have politicians in thier backpocket, <b>THat's the real fact. </b>

The prices Americans pay for prescription drugs, which are far higher than those paid by citizens of any other developed country. The pharmaceutical industry is - and has been for years - the most profitable of all businesses in the U.S. In the annual Fortune 500 survey, the pharmaceutical industry topped the list of the most profitable industries, with a return of 17% on revenue. And because of extraordinarily generous tax breaks but mostly because of high prices guaranteed by Congress, the U.S. pharmaceutical industry, year in and year out, ranks as the country's richest. Pfizer, which for 2002 reported profits of $9.1 billion on revenue of $32.4 billion, earned a return on revenue of 28%, a rate more than twice that of General Electric, nine times that of Wal-Mart and 31 times that of General Motors.

Yes they spend a lot of money o research and development but the REAL FACT is that pharm companies spends tens of millions on marketing and advertising, thus resulting in higher prices for your medications. no one really knows how the money is spent. Indeed, the industry has refused to open its books to government auditors and once waged a nine-year legal battle with the General Accounting Office (GAO), Congress's investigative arm, to keep the information secret. Congress could subpoena the information but has refused to do so, in no small part because of the power of the pharmaceutical industry lobby. While the industry is quick to claim how much it must spend to come up with new drugs, it is slow to acknowledge the contributions of the Federal Government and American taxpayers. Actually, pharmacutical companies get 36% of their funding from the govt to discover new drugs.
<b>
The real reason</b> the industry does so well in the capital is its potent lobby. It maintains more than 600 lobbyists - more than one for every member of Congress. It spent $435 million to influence Washington from 1996 to 2003 and handed out $57.9 million in contributions from 1991 to 2002, according to Common Cause.

So whoever thinks it's okay to pay more for your meds in the United States, is sadly being fooled and blind.