Pharma spends more on marketing than development制药公司花费更多的营销比发展
Why are pharmaceuticals so expensive?为什么药品那么贵？ This question has been asked for many years.这个问题已问过了很多年。 In fact this was the question asked by Senator Estes Kefauver (D) in the late 1950s.其实这是质询参议员estes kefauver （ d ）在上世纪50年代末。 Senator Kefauver was the first to put together an indictment against the business practices of the pharmaceutical industry.参议员kefauver是第一家放在一起刑事起诉书对商业惯例的制药业。 In fact he lobbed three charges at the pharmaceutical industry at the time.其实，他lobbed三项控罪，在制药工业上的时间。
They were the following:它们分别是：
1) Patents sustained predatory prices and excessive margins 1 ）专利持续掠夺性的价格和过高的利润率
2) Costs and prices were extravagantly increased by large expenditures in marketing 2 ）成本及价格均大手大脚，增加大笔支出，在市场营销
3) Most of the industry’s new products were no more effective than established drugs on the market(1). 3 ）大部分行业的新产品，没有更有效的既定药物对市场（ 1 ） 。
If you look at these charges they are much the same accusations that many people blame the如果你看看这些收费是多少，同时指责说，很多人责怪 pharmaceutical industry制药业 of practicing right now, fifty years later.练，现在， 50年后。 Has anything changed in the past fifty years?有什么改变，在过去的五十年？
The core of this debate, especially in the US where direct-to-consumer marketing is legal, is the amount核心这次辩论中，特别是在美国哪里直接面向消费者的营销是合法的，是数额 pharmaceutical companies制药公司 spend on marketing vs. the amount spent on research and development (R&D).花在行销主场迎战数额用于研究和开发（ R ＆ D ） 。 Aren’t we all lead to believe that the high cost of research and development is the reason that是不是我们都带头认为，成本高的研究和发展是原因 pharmaceuticals药品 are so incredibly expensive?如此令人难以置信的昂贵？ The Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA) uses data from IMS, a firm specializing in pharmaceutical market intelligence, to conclude that pharmaceutical companies spend US $29.6 billion on R&D and US $27.7 billion for all promotional activities (data from 2004).药品研究与制造商协会（ phrma ）使用数据，从IMS的，坚定的专门从事药品市场情报，得出结论认为，制药公司花费美国296亿美元的研发与美国27700000000美元所有宣传活动（数据从2004年） 。 Even if these numbers can be trusted, and the pharmaceutical industry is altruistic, why are these expenses so close?即使这些数字可以信任和制药业是利他，为什么这些费用如此接近？ An investigative article in the Public Library of Science (PLoS), who used proprietary databases to construct a new, and quite possibly more accurate estimate, states the money goes to marketing twice as often than R&D.负责调查工作的文章中的Public Library of Science （ plos ） ，他们使用自有的数据库，以建造一个新的，而且很可能更准确的估计，国家的钱去推销的两倍，往往比研发。
Show me the money. 显示出我的钱。
It is important to note that the PLoS is an open source publication.但必须注意的是，该plos是一个开源出版。 In fact the publication states that you may use its articles and “download, copy, distribute, and use (with attribution) any way you wish.” This means that the PLoS is not taking money from anyone and so are free to publish articles that go against the mainstream.其实出版的国家，你可以用它的文章和"下载，复制，分发，并使用（归属） ，以任何方式，你想" ，这意味着该plos不是以金钱的人，所以可以自由发表文章，认为违背主流。 Most importantly, they are not taking money from pharmaceutical companies and can publish content like this without fear of reprisal.最重要的是，他们不是以钱来自制药公司和可以公布的内容，像这样没有惧怕报复。 What was published in “The Cost of Pushing Pills: A New Estimate of Pharmaceutical Promotion Expenditures in the United States” does go against the mainstream – by clearly stating that the pharmaceutical industry is spending more on marketing, much more than most people would expect.什么是发表在"成本推动丸：一种新的估计，药品推广支出，在美国"是否违背主流-明确表示，制药业是多花些营销，远远超过了大多数人所期望的。
As the US represents 43% of global sales and global promotion expenditures, knowing the amount of money put into marketing is essential.作为美国代表43 ％的全球销售和全球推广支出，明知这笔钱投入市场营销是必不可少的。 It is also important to note that according to CAM, which is a global company that audits the promotional activities of the pharmaceutical industry, about 30% of promotional spending is not accounted for in their figures.它也必须注意到，根据凸轮，这是一个全球性的公司，即审计促销活动的制药工业中，约有30 ％的促销费用是没有计算在他们的数据。 The breakdown is not accurately known of unmonitored promotion, but CAM believes that approximately 10% is due to incomplete disclosure by surveyed有关数字不准确已知的受检推广，但凸轮认为，大约有百分之十是由于不完全统计披露被调查 physicians医师 and 20% comes from promotion geared towards physicians not surveyed or unmonitored journals.和20 ％来自于促进面向医师不接受调查或受检期刊。 Combining the information gathered from CAM, as well as IMS, the total amount of money spent on marketing by pharmaceuticals was US $57.5 billion for 2004.结合收集到的资料，由凸轮，以及IMS的，其总数额的金钱花在营销药品，是美国57500000000美元为2004 。 The total spent on domestic industrial pharmaceutical R&D was US $31.5 billion.总花费对国内制药工业的研发，是美国31500000000美元。
There is quite a bit of difference between the money spent on R&D and marketing.有相当多的差异，将金钱用于研发和行销。 If we exclude direct-to-consumer marketing, of the US $57.5 billion, CAM estimates that 80% of this money is spent on physicians.如果我们排除直接向消费者销售，对美国57500000000美元，凸轮估计，有八成的钱是花在医师。 This means that, with 700,000 practicing physicians in the US, the pharmaceutical industry spent nearly US $61,000 in promotion per physician!这意味着，随着700000医师，在美国，制药业花了将近美国61000美元在推广每医师！ It is interesting to note that according to the US census the real median household income (2003) was $43,318.值得一提的是，根据美国人口普查真正的家庭入息中位数（ 2003 ） 43318美元。
Is Kefauver right? 是kefauver权利？
While knowing that the pharmaceutical industry spends nearly US $57.5 billion on marketing and US $31.5 billion on R&D, those that believe the industry is promotion based, and not entirely altruistic as the industry claims, have some proof to this claim.虽然明知制药业花了将近美国57500000000美元对市场营销和美国31500000000美元研发系统，因为那些相信是业界推广为基础，而且不完全利他作为业界声称，有一些证据证明这种说法。 How can we continue to pump money into, and grant legislation to, an industry that would rather hide the truth than be honest?我们如何能继续泵资金投入，并给予立法，是一个行业会，而不是隐瞒真相比诚实吗？ How far are we from formally proving Kefauver’s other claims to be true?还有多远，我们从正式证明kefauver的其他索赔要求，是真实的吗？ Whether or not we can all agree on the pharmaceutical industry’s place in our society – no industry should go fifty years without ethical restrictions, while claiming they are the champions of society.与否，我们大家都可以同意对制药业的地方，在我们的社会-没有业应该去五十年，没有道德的限制，而声称他们是冠军的社会。
References:参考文献：
1) The Cost of Pushing Pills: A New Estimate of Pharmaceutical Promotion Expenditures in the United States 1 ）的成本推丸：一种新的估计，药品推广支出在美国
Health 健康 Section has more related reports 科更多相关报道 Help keep RINF going..有利于保持rinf去..Comment on 'Pharma spends more on marketing than development' : 评论'医药花费更多的营销比发展' ：
Related News: 相关新闻：
