Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below slimbastard
New member
interesting article http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/NEWS/2003/NEW00948.html
FDA / US Customs blitz
- Thread starter slimbastard
- Start date
A
Animal
Guest
I think you also need to read into it what the Talimerican Nazi's are actually doing!
Look at the drugs seized from what countries in their percentage listing and then what the drugs do below:
or example,15.8% (161) entered the U.S. from Canada.
That was the highest percentage country. Now why don't you guess who is buying those 'drugs' and what they are which is listed in the bullets of the article.
Now learn that the FEDTHUGS of the FDA are EXTREMELY against all this reimportation and even importation from canadas like canada because the pharm companies have the feds in their pocket. Quite a few states are enacting importation procedures to import from canada while the feds have told them that's against the law and they will seize it. Nice and that's YOUR gov!
Anyhow, after you looked at what they seized and what it was and does, who are the fedthugs fucking over?
OLD PEOPLE and the SICK!
Pretty cool, huh!
They aren't stopping so much of the illegal drugs, but the drugs sick/poor people need to live.
Lovely bunch of Nazi's.
Look at the drugs seized from what countries in their percentage listing and then what the drugs do below:
or example,15.8% (161) entered the U.S. from Canada.
That was the highest percentage country. Now why don't you guess who is buying those 'drugs' and what they are which is listed in the bullets of the article.
Now learn that the FEDTHUGS of the FDA are EXTREMELY against all this reimportation and even importation from canadas like canada because the pharm companies have the feds in their pocket. Quite a few states are enacting importation procedures to import from canada while the feds have told them that's against the law and they will seize it. Nice and that's YOUR gov!
Anyhow, after you looked at what they seized and what it was and does, who are the fedthugs fucking over?
OLD PEOPLE and the SICK!
Pretty cool, huh!
They aren't stopping so much of the illegal drugs, but the drugs sick/poor people need to live.
Lovely bunch of Nazi's.
This happens every year. It is an effort to gain credibility so their budgets get increased every year. I expect it every year. We will soon hear all about sources being busted and websites being shut down.
Every year just like clock work...tic-toc-tic-toc
Every year just like clock work...tic-toc-tic-toc
rjl296
New member
Eight Quebec companies made Research Infosource's elite "$100 Million Club", reserved for firms that invested $100 million or more in R&D activities: Pratt & Whitney Canada, Bell Canada, Bombardier, Alcan, Pfizer Canada , Merck Frosst Canada, Tembec and Hydro-Québec.
Overall, Canada's Top R&D companies invested $10.9 billion on research and development activities in fiscal 2002,
thats what canada spends on R&D
Overall, Canada's Top R&D companies invested $10.9 billion on research and development activities in fiscal 2002,
thats what canada spends on R&D
.
Schering Plough spent 2.3 billion in R&D last year and Merck spent over 5 billion. There are no pharma companies in any country other than the US that come even close.
The FDA mandates that pharm companies must recoup their expenses from R & D in the country in which they are based, thats why US drugs are so expensive. Those same drugs can be sold in Canada or wherever for a fraction of the cost.
Its cheaper to buy drugs from Canada and ship them in, its just a legal loophole that'll be closed w/in 5 years. Then drugs will be much cheaper here and the prices will be driven up in other countries
Thats BS, I dont' know where that stat came from but most US based pharm companies do the opposite, spend twice as much on R&D as they do on marketing. As an average pharm companies spend 20% of their revenue on R&D and 10% on marketing...far less than auto manaufacturers or virtually any other industry.
Schering Plough spent 2.3 billion in R&D last year and Merck spent over 5 billion. There are no pharma companies in any country other than the US that come even close.
The FDA mandates that pharm companies must recoup their expenses from R & D in the country in which they are based, thats why US drugs are so expensive. Those same drugs can be sold in Canada or wherever for a fraction of the cost.
Its cheaper to buy drugs from Canada and ship them in, its just a legal loophole that'll be closed w/in 5 years. Then drugs will be much cheaper here and the prices will be driven up in other countries
Thats BS, I dont' know where that stat came from but most US based pharm companies do the opposite, spend twice as much on R&D as they do on marketing. As an average pharm companies spend 20% of their revenue on R&D and 10% on marketing...far less than auto manaufacturers or virtually any other industry.
LANCEA9847
New member
as long as the aas keep coming ....who cares?
no, you're right. without proof sources we're all just pulling #s out of our ass.
I hope I didnt' come off like a dick, I'm just sensitive about it because I work for a pharma company and get crap all the time about how expensive stuff is and how we "rip old people off" and stuff.
anyway, here is where I got my numbers from, this is the company I previously worked for.
19.7% of total revenues spent on R&D, 2X as much as was spent on marketing.
http://media.corporate-ir.net/media_files/IROL/89/89839/reports/3q03product.pdf
i'll drink to that!
A
Animal
Guest
Thank you for that and funny how people will still defend the industry when they don't even know.
The FDA has a law that the company which makes the chem must rip off the people in its own country? WTF IS THAT?!
If nothing else, ALL fortune 500 countries are showing profits by outsourcing which is moving jobs overseas for cheap labor including companies like levis which no longer makes a single stitch on US soil, IBM, GE, and lowe's to name a few.
Now, the pharm industry has no outsourcing whatsoever and what is that law? And as somebody so succinctly put it, american drug companies aren't the only ones in the world as well as the fact that 90+% of all chems used in drugs sold OTC and script come from CHINA!
The FDA has a law that the company which makes the chem must rip off the people in its own country? WTF IS THAT?!
If nothing else, ALL fortune 500 countries are showing profits by outsourcing which is moving jobs overseas for cheap labor including companies like levis which no longer makes a single stitch on US soil, IBM, GE, and lowe's to name a few.
Now, the pharm industry has no outsourcing whatsoever and what is that law? And as somebody so succinctly put it, american drug companies aren't the only ones in the world as well as the fact that 90+% of all chems used in drugs sold OTC and script come from CHINA!
A
Animal
Guest
Yea, it's all made up, especially by the industries only publications!
# Since 1995, R&D staff of U.S. brand name drug companies have decreased by 2%, while marketing staff have increased by 59%. Currently, 22% of staff are employed in research and development, while 39% are in marketing. (PhRMA Industry Profile 2000; percentages calculated by Sager and Socolar)
# In 2000, Merck spent $161 million on advertising for Vioxx. That is more than Pepsico spent advertising Pepsi. ($125 million), and more than Anheuser-Busch spent advertising Budweiser.($146 million). The increase in Vioxx sales in 2000 accounted for 5.7% of the 1 year increase in drug spending. (NIHCM)
# A study by Westfall, et al, found that 96% of physicians and staff had taken samples for personal or family use in the preceding year. (JAMA, 1997)
# According to industry estimates, drug companies spent $15.7 billion dollars on promotion in 2000. $7.2 billion dollars worth of free samples were distributed that year(IMS Health).
# Since 1995, R&D staff of U.S. brand name drug companies have decreased by 2%, while marketing staff have increased by 59%. Currently, 22% of staff are employed in research and development, while 39% are in marketing. (PhRMA Industry Profile 2000; percentages calculated by Sager and Socolar)
# In 2000, Merck spent $161 million on advertising for Vioxx. That is more than Pepsico spent advertising Pepsi. ($125 million), and more than Anheuser-Busch spent advertising Budweiser.($146 million). The increase in Vioxx sales in 2000 accounted for 5.7% of the 1 year increase in drug spending. (NIHCM)
# A study by Westfall, et al, found that 96% of physicians and staff had taken samples for personal or family use in the preceding year. (JAMA, 1997)
# According to industry estimates, drug companies spent $15.7 billion dollars on promotion in 2000. $7.2 billion dollars worth of free samples were distributed that year(IMS Health).
A
Animal
Guest
You bet I am, but I'm sure the info written below by the wall street journal in July of 2000 is full of falsehoods and outright lies.
Marketing Costs
The industry's response to rising complaints over prices is to repeat an argument it has used for years: Drugs are priced to support expensive and risky research. Indeed, the pharmaceutical industry's spending on research and development has tripled since 1990 to $26.4 billion. As a percentage of sales, it spends more on research than almost any other industry.
But the drug industry still spends far more on salesmen than it does on scientists. Its army of nearly 70,000 U.S. salespeople costs roughly $7 billion a year. And although they often deliver information doctors need, they do so at a high cost: The average sales call lasts seven minutes but costs companies $100 to $300 each to make. Overall, the industry's marketing and administration expenses are generally more than twice those of research and development. At Pfizer, for instance, marketing and administration make up 39% of expenses, compared with 17% for R&D.
One of the fastest-growing costs at pharmaceutical companies is consumer ads. In 1998, according to the research firm Competitive Media, Schering-Plough Corp. spent $136 million advertising just one medicine, its allergy drug Claritin. That's more than Coca-Cola Co. spent advertising Coke, or Anheuser-Busch Cos. spent advertising Budweiser. Schering-Plough spent an additional $53 million that year on salesmen who visited doctors in person to pitch the drug, according to the research firm IMS Health.
With more and more of the industry's research being conducted in biotech labs, its core competency increasingly is marketing, not discovery. Some pharmaceutical executives find these trends disturbing. "It's the equivalent of the arms race," says Dr. Garnier. "We could have a much more efficient system to promote the drugs, but you'd get blown out of the water. You can't be rational in this effort."
Marketing Costs
The industry's response to rising complaints over prices is to repeat an argument it has used for years: Drugs are priced to support expensive and risky research. Indeed, the pharmaceutical industry's spending on research and development has tripled since 1990 to $26.4 billion. As a percentage of sales, it spends more on research than almost any other industry.
But the drug industry still spends far more on salesmen than it does on scientists. Its army of nearly 70,000 U.S. salespeople costs roughly $7 billion a year. And although they often deliver information doctors need, they do so at a high cost: The average sales call lasts seven minutes but costs companies $100 to $300 each to make. Overall, the industry's marketing and administration expenses are generally more than twice those of research and development. At Pfizer, for instance, marketing and administration make up 39% of expenses, compared with 17% for R&D.
One of the fastest-growing costs at pharmaceutical companies is consumer ads. In 1998, according to the research firm Competitive Media, Schering-Plough Corp. spent $136 million advertising just one medicine, its allergy drug Claritin. That's more than Coca-Cola Co. spent advertising Coke, or Anheuser-Busch Cos. spent advertising Budweiser. Schering-Plough spent an additional $53 million that year on salesmen who visited doctors in person to pitch the drug, according to the research firm IMS Health.
With more and more of the industry's research being conducted in biotech labs, its core competency increasingly is marketing, not discovery. Some pharmaceutical executives find these trends disturbing. "It's the equivalent of the arms race," says Dr. Garnier. "We could have a much more efficient system to promote the drugs, but you'd get blown out of the water. You can't be rational in this effort."
Last edited:
