All of which, naturally, will be paid for by consumers in the form of even higher drug prices.
An ad blitz appears to be the next logical step after big pharma finished paid its share for last week's CLINTONCON in Philly.
They will probably toss in plugs for TTP and TTIP seeing how those "deals" will enable them to spike drug prices in ALL signatory nations, not just the US !
This also probably means a corporate troll department to make sure that people can't write anything online. Expect 99 quick spammish messages on top of this list, the instant that a relevant story is posted. Most people won't bother to read down to the real comments. At least that's how it works elsewhere in the blogosphere.
Drug prices in the U.S. are vastly above what they are in any other country. It has to do with the government granting them all sorts of monopoly powers.
I already skip prescriptions due to the fact they are too high. At my age and condition it really matters.
Big farce by Big Pharma
Profit should NEVER be the motivating factor when people's lives are on the line. But, that's unfettered capitalism guys.
And the gullible masses that believe and support Hillary or trump will swallow even more big Pharma overpricing rip off
Sorry rofo47 profit is the name of the game. In the 80s when patients became customers, I saw a rapid decline in the quality of healthcare even as that care became more and more expensive. Hospitals, laboratories, clinics, etc live to make money and they do not care as much about quality.
God, how I HATE multinational capitalism. Big pharma is sodomizing all of us. We, the people need to put a stop to this massive price gouging. And now they want to brainwash us too! REVOLT!!!
Big Phat Liars
Didn't she at one time fly around on a private plane funded by PhRMA? Thought I read that somewhere.
(CNN)Hillary Clinton took direct aim at pharmaceutical companies on Tuesday when she unveiled a plan to lower prescription drug prices, charging that some "bad actors" are "making a fortune off of people's misfortune."
"I have been fighting to change this law for years and as president, I will get it done,"
"Under my plan, drug companies who want to keep getting federal support will have to redirect more of their profits into meaningful investments in research and development," Clinton said at a community forum in Iowa. "That will mean more breakthroughs, more good drugs, not fewer."
2015 - Clinton accepted $164315 despite her tough stance against the industry.
Between that declaration and her now saying single-payer can never pass, Clinton has vacuumed in roughly $13.2 million from sources in the health sector, according to data compiled by the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics. That includes $11.2 million from the sector when Clinton was a senator and $2 million from health industry sources during her 2016 presidential campaign. In a 2006 story about her relationship with the health industry, the New York Times noted that during her Senate reelection campaign, she was "receiving hundreds of thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from doctors, hospitals, drug manufacturers and insurers" and had become "the No. 2 recipient of donations from the industry." The Intercept also reported that from 2013 to 2015, Clinton received more than $2.8 million in speaking fees from the health industry.
So which shall we believe????? The WORDS or the DEEDS ?
Never any thought of actually LOWERING the prices and making them reasonable instead of spending more of their ill-gotten gains on pretending they are desirable!!!
I am so sick of pharma adds in any event. Every other commercial out there, every magazine touting drugs. I want to go back to when they couldn't advertise to consumers at all. And when I could afford my medicine.
After one gets informed they have to apply the capacity of being able to express that knowledge base or some approximate sense of it when communicating to others. It's not too convincing to give a reference source except to those who have indicated they are or may be willing to read such material. And this may be particularly so when someone's own information is lacking but where strong suspicions and common sense rationalizing lead in a given direction. Which is the case most of the time with virtually everything.
A contemporary aid or variation is the ubiquitous internet. In mere moments reams of material are available about the history and operational motifs of Big Pharma. When the information from one sight compares favorably to another a sense of verification is gotten. I would think this is the usual present day introduction to studying a topic, with more in-depth and broader information coming from investigative literature such as you mentioned.
And in rotten Zika Virus news: