This is a silly talking point that lots of companies bounce around - you know how insulin costs money because it was so expensive to develop... Except no, it was invented in Canada and the researchers released the formula for free[1] as a "benefit to humanity" thing... then a few US companies acquired rights to produce it and proceeded to establish market control in the US - the fact that insulin isn't being sold at cost is just pure greed.
And this happens a lot, very often drugs are innovated using public funds and then sold to private companies to produce which milk the consumers for profit - this whole "it pays for R&D" is a pharmaceutical PR line, just like when McDonalds buried their hot coffee lawsuit under "well, if people weren't such klutzes". The US isn't the great innovator here to save us all and a huge proportion of your drug prices cycles back into marketing to sell more of the drug.
[1] Technically, they sold it for a dollar to the University of Toronto
Of course it does. Because people don’t buy and use the drug if they don’t know about it..?
Money matters. Marketing to recoup costs matters. Piles of cash to get every dollar of return on an investment matters. That allows the company to turn around and invest in future promising drugs, trials, other companies, marketing to bring awareness to the solution and hopefully get people to buy and use it.
Making sure doctors are well informed about treatment options are one thing... egging patients on to request a possibly mismatched medication and taking doctors out to lunch to encourage the prescription of a possibly mismatched medication is entirely different.
The ideal case for drugs is that no one actually needs them so no one takes them - this is a large contributor as to why this market should be heavily nationalized.
Unless someone has a medical degree they're not an informed patient - they're someone who has been fed information through pharma PR campaigns to believe they're informed about a topic while only knowing information that would contribute to a private corporation's profit.
It is amazingly difficult to find good balanced information on prescriptions in the US - even doctors have issues.
Especially in the case of if/when my life is on the line, I want to know about my options. I'd much rather have information overload, than be blind.
And between my doctor and I, we will discern what is a real option, what is BS, and what tradeoffs I am willing to make in an effort to extend my life.
Using that argument millions of Americans have refused to let their children be vaccinated because they know more about medicine - even themselves. If your medical decision will endanger others it is a matter for The Great Protector, and, it's my opinion, that the great American habit of second guessing experts is what has let groups that oppose vaccinations, a round earth and the dangers of CO2 infiltrate modern society at such a large level.
Considering cancer, heart disease, or dementia aren't contagious, my individual treatment decision does not threaten those surrounding me.
I want to know as much as possible about treatments, their side effects, and tradeoffs. And if I partially learn about those items from a commercial, who cares? I want more time with my friends and family. I don't care about the source of a potential solution.
And the doctor can still elect to not provide the medication. The treatment decision is expertly gated, regardless of my wishes or insistence that "I know better".
I'll admit I have no evidence advertising to patients increases drug sales. But, considering how often I see drug commercials on television explicitly targeting patients, it seems the drug companies have evidence it works.
This is a silly talking point that lots of companies bounce around - you know how insulin costs money because it was so expensive to develop... Except no, it was invented in Canada and the researchers released the formula for free[1] as a "benefit to humanity" thing... then a few US companies acquired rights to produce it and proceeded to establish market control in the US - the fact that insulin isn't being sold at cost is just pure greed.
And this happens a lot, very often drugs are innovated using public funds and then sold to private companies to produce which milk the consumers for profit - this whole "it pays for R&D" is a pharmaceutical PR line, just like when McDonalds buried their hot coffee lawsuit under "well, if people weren't such klutzes". The US isn't the great innovator here to save us all and a huge proportion of your drug prices cycles back into marketing to sell more of the drug.
[1] Technically, they sold it for a dollar to the University of Toronto