Farmaceutische industrie puur een winstgedreven industrie.*
Zij die nog denken dat de farmaceutische industrie een droombeeld is van een industrie gebaseerd op levensreddende research en innovatie zullen bij het zien van de cijfers bedrogen uitkomen. In het jaar 2004 (de laatst bekende cijfers) gaf deze industrie in Amerika 31,5 miljard dollar uit aan research en ontwikkeling terwijl in dezelfde periode
bijna twee keer zoveel, 57,5 miljard dollar uitgegeven werd aan promotionele activiteiten.
Behalve de promotie richting consumenten gaat de rest voor 80% naar de promotie
voor artsen en 20% naar de apotheken. Voor de duidelijkheid dat is 61.000 dollar
per Amerikaanse arts. De 57,5 miljard is ca. 25% van de omzet. De uitgaven voor
promotie zijn waarschijnlijk nog veel hoger omdat bijv. al de kosten van ghostwriting en off-label promotie niet in de cijfers opgenomen zijn, en zullen zeker ruim 30% bedragen. In 2001 werd al 33% berekend. In Europa liggen die cijfers zeker niet anders want in 2006 bleek uit de opgave van 5 bedrijven (15 bedrijven wilden geen gegevens verstrekken) dat de uitgave voor promotie tussen de 31 en 50% van de omzet uitmaakte.
Klik hier
voor het hele rapport.
Drug Industry Spends Nearly Twice As Much On Marketing Than On Research And Development
The pharmaceutical industry spends almost twice as much on the marketing and promotion of drugs than on research and development, according to a new analysis in this week's PLoS
Medicine.
In their analysis of data from two market research companies, IMS and CAM, Marc-André Gagnon and Joel Lexchin (York University, Toronto, Canada) found that US drug companies spent US$57.5 billion on promotional activities in 2004, the latest year for which figures were
available.
In comparison, the National Science Foundation reported that in 2004 the amount of industrial pharmaceutical research and development (including public funds for industrial research and development) was US$31.5 billion in the United States.
For the last 50 years, say the authors, there has been an ongoing debate as to which image of the drug industry is most accurate. The industry promotes a vision of itself, say the authors, as "research-driven, innovative, and life-saving," but the industry's critics contend that the drug industry is based on
"market-driven profiteering."
The findings of their study, say Gagnon and Lexchin, "confirms the public image of a marketing-driven industry and provides an important argument to petition in favor of transforming the workings of the industry in the direction of more research and less promotion."
The types of promotion that were included in the US$57.5 billion figure included free samples, visits from drug reps ("detailers"), direct to consumer advertising of drugs, meetings with doctors to promote products, e-mail promotions, direct mail, and clinical trials designed to promote the prescription of new drugs rather than to generate scientific data (these are known as "seeding trials").
The authors believe that their figure of US$57.5 billion is likely to be an underestimate. "There are other avenues for promotion that would not be captured by either IMS or CAM," they say. These avenues include the ghostwriting of articles in medical journals by drug company employees, or the off-label promotion of drugs.
Gagnon MA, Lexchin J (2008)
"The cost of pushing pills: A new estimate of pharmaceutical promotion expenditures in the United States."
PLoS Med 5(1): e1.
Click here to view article online
About PLoS Medicine
PLoS Medicine is an open access, freely available international medical journal. It publishes original research that enhances our understanding of human health and disease, together with commentary and analysis of important global health issues. For more information, visit http://www.plosmedicine.org
About the Public Library of Science
The Public Library of Science (PLoS) is a non-profit organization of scientists and physicians committed to making the world's scientific and medical literature a freely available public resource. For more information, visit
http://www.plos.org
(Januari
2008)
Reacties:
