Question to Those Critical of Pharmaceutical Companies
Those critical of pharmaceutical companies on the grounds that such firms waste resources on drug development that is not essential to improving the health of patients often point to viagra as the example. Why don’t they point to birth control?
March 10th, 2009 at 10:14 am
Neither are very good cases.
First: Viagra was produced by Pfizer as a potential drug for hypertension. During its first clinical trials they noticed an unexpected side effect and decided to change the drug’s marketing after it was already developed. It then quickly got FDA approval for both hypertension and sexual dysfunction.
Second: Synthetic hormone research was not funded by pharmaceutical companies. The first synthesis of progesterone was done by an organic chemistry professor at Penn State in the 30s. He couldn’t find anyone to commercialize the product and the research relied on outside funding from institutions (such as the the Worcester Foundation for Experimental Biology and Planned Parenthood). In addition, the FDA only approved the drug for menstrual disorders initially and only later for contraception.
March 10th, 2009 at 8:31 pm
I, for one, have no issue with big phrama’s need to spend money on R@D… It’s exactly the reason why we have kick-ass allergy meds, mind drugs, and lifestyle drugs that allow older folks to continue having active lives. The fact is that bringing a drug to market costs a small fortune and these guys need to make some money where they can get it.
The bigger issue is “access to drugs” for the common man. Pharma needs money to develop cutting edge drugs. Folks need medications to stay healthy. If these folks can’t afford the drugs, the company doesn’t win and neither does the common man.
March 11th, 2009 at 8:07 pm
Also, that argument isn’t generally used against drug companies, it’s used to point out why government funding for some medications that aren’t profitable is needed.
And Viagra is used instead of birth control pills because limp dicks are funnier than unplanned pregnancy. Better rhetoric.
March 12th, 2009 at 1:06 pm
I actually think its has less to do with funny and more to do with who it affects. Many of the people that point out the waste in producing pills to manage erectile dysfunction do not suffer from the problem. While practically everyone benefits from birth control, including those that are critical of pharmaceutical companies.
Point out waste when its not beneficial for you but ignore it when it helps you. Those kinds of detractors are hypocrites.