Hello,
The only show that holds my interest about medicine anymore is Mystery Diagnosis, even lost interest in House

Is it true that, after developing some new miracle drug, NIH essentially gives the drug to a favored pharmacy? For large bribes to administrators, maybe?

If you read that book I posted the title to....Dr. Angell MD explains it completely.

I read it a while back, so I don't want to paraphrase it. But I seem to recall that the "rights" to the drug are leased from the discoverer. Now when NIH is involved, it can become political, and I don't know the nuances of that.

Suffice it to say, Big Pharma is mostly a marketing tool, today. Back when I started in this area, they actually discovered chemical products and patented them. But that is not true today.
For example... the metabolic by products of drugs are done today as new entities by a separate company (companies). Examples are Clarinex (from Claritin) and Xopenex (from albuterol). I am sure there are others now but Sepracor (which is going under or has by now did those two.). The Big Pharma labs are becoming extinct as I type this.

I do think they do some dosage form manipulation. Oral forms, etc, plus the marketing still. But I do know that chemists in some large pharm companies buy the rights to drugs made in Japan and Northern Europe commonly.

I stopped watching the "House" series since I found it difficult to understand most of the rapid fire dialogue -- house growled and the nurses spoke high pitched nasal. It was also totally unbelievable when everbody seemed to have an encylopediatric knowledge of medicine. This forum illustrates the true lack of knowledge posessed by average Doctors

Hi jackie,

I don't care for House M.D., for different reasons, but my guess is that the writers/producers liked - or are emulating (growling & nasality aside) or as an homage to - the style of director/producer/screenwriter Howard Hawks - renowned for realistic rapid-fire dialog, e.g His Girl Friday and The Thing From Another World. I've always loved that kind of writing in film/TV, but to each their own - that's cool!

But I don't understand what's totally unbelievable (unrealistic?) about characters in a hospital setting having an encylopedic knowledge of medicine. Any time I've had the misfortune of spending time in an ED, I've heard lots of that (and had to insist on translations to lay terms). Some of House's writers (I understand from a quick googling) are M.Ds. I give 'em credit for trying to raise the bar of television writing (again - to each their own! )

I think much of the success (and good storytelling) of writers like Michael Crichton (Andromeda Strain, Jurassic Park) & John Grisham (The Firm, The Pelican Brief, The Rainmaker) is due to the fact that they are, respectively, a doctor/biological anthropologist and a lawyer.

I guess I wouldn't call it a lack - maybe a difference. Even specialists have to learn/know about many, many diseases with many many variables, while some patients have the time (and incentive) to learn a lot more about the very few that affect us personally, and I think that's what we see here. I've also seen posts by folks whose doctors are suffering the same maladies as the posters, and those patients often feel they have a special doctor indeed - one who understands (and knows more than the average bear) because it affects them personally as well. I have a couple of doctors like that, (a neurologist who has migraines, and an ortho who has both DDD and PN) and I wish I had more!

Doc

I can't even stand to watch Dr. Oz or Dr. Phil.
I hear you Mrs D regarding Pharma becoming a marketing tool, I remember when they did the research too.

I'm sure people have heard that there have been recent shortages of some generic chemo drugs and meds that they use during surgery. I saw a good news report on PBS a few nights ago, many companies have stopped producing them because they just aren't profitable enough. What I found especially reprehensible was what they termed 'gray marketing', some secondary companies stockpiled supplies of the meds when they were cheap and plentiful and have actually been able to sell them to hospitals at a 350% mark up. If it isn't already, that cost will be passed on to us little people. Some people with cancer were also unable to get the appropriate chemo drug and had to use what the Dr. could obtain even though it was known to be less effective.

I know antibiotic resistant bacteria arise from people not finishing meds, use in cattle, etc. A couple of authors have felt Phama is contributing to that as well, not developing as many new antibiotics as they used to because they are less profitable than blockbuster meds. There are many new COPD meds in the pipeline and companies are apparently racing to be first to market them. You guessed it, patents have either just expired or are soon going to on what we are using now.

I think my pulmo had a midlife crisis a few yeas ago and was trying to be 'House', grew the scruffy little unshaven look, etc. That wasn't too bad but I had a little problem keeping a straight face when he apparently used Just For Men or something and dyed it.
Zygo

Two great nations, divided only by a common language ---

Four when you throw in Canada and Australia....

I was not talking about anything other than US and UK

Hi Jomar, thanks for this 5 part video. I am on too many drugs. I am going to start to question more. thanks for putting this on the site. ginnie