*Gasp*, How dare companies make profit! After all shareholders are do gooders and invest the money not to gain interest, but to help people.
It is pointless to discuss with you. You blatantly refuse to inform yourself.If you would, you would know, that the FDA has no say on which sutdy is made under which terms. It only supervises proper conduct and later judgges, if the series of studies are really proving, what the company thinks they prove. Only then will the FDA consider to allow the medication. After all, the medication has to have better efficacy or lesser side effects than an already regulated medication.
Do You know, what it takes to write up a study summary and submit it to the FDA? You need doctors and lawyers. Those people don´t work for free. Administration is such a broad term, almsot anything can fit in. It depends on where the administration costs of a study are booked. Seldom hte cost of flights and business meetings with doctors and participants are booked under R&D. More liklely they are booked under, guess what, Travel expenses, which are part of, guess what, administraion.
I have read the first link you provided. So please tell me, where is the data, that proves, that placebo works better in long term? Or is it just an assumption on your part? Please note, that one satudy does not prove anything. Efficacy has to be proven at least in 3 different stages in multiple studies. All those studies in the first link were at best stage 2 studies, more likely stage one studies.
BTW, all the bookkeeping, the job supervision, the quality control are most likely under the term administration. The second, that quality control, bookkeeping is not needed, the second the administration costs will drop...
They don´t pay doctors to prescribe the drug, they advertise to get doctors to prescribe their product and not the one of the competitor, when prescription is needed.
First you claim, that the government can not be trusted in regulating those companies, then you use a link to the same government agency, that can´t be trusted to prove your point? Does that make sense?
It is pointless to discuss with you. You blatantly refuse to inform yourself.If you would, you would know, that the FDA has no say on which sutdy is made under which terms. It only supervises proper conduct and later judgges, if the series of studies are really proving, what the company thinks they prove. Only then will the FDA consider to allow the medication. After all, the medication has to have better efficacy or lesser side effects than an already regulated medication.
Do You know, what it takes to write up a study summary and submit it to the FDA? You need doctors and lawyers. Those people don´t work for free. Administration is such a broad term, almsot anything can fit in. It depends on where the administration costs of a study are booked. Seldom hte cost of flights and business meetings with doctors and participants are booked under R&D. More liklely they are booked under, guess what, Travel expenses, which are part of, guess what, administraion.
I have read the first link you provided. So please tell me, where is the data, that proves, that placebo works better in long term? Or is it just an assumption on your part? Please note, that one satudy does not prove anything. Efficacy has to be proven at least in 3 different stages in multiple studies. All those studies in the first link were at best stage 2 studies, more likely stage one studies.
BTW, all the bookkeeping, the job supervision, the quality control are most likely under the term administration. The second, that quality control, bookkeeping is not needed, the second the administration costs will drop...
They don´t pay doctors to prescribe the drug, they advertise to get doctors to prescribe their product and not the one of the competitor, when prescription is needed.
First you claim, that the government can not be trusted in regulating those companies, then you use a link to the same government agency, that can´t be trusted to prove your point? Does that make sense?
Upvote
0
