So why is it acceptable for every other profession--businessmen, bankers, attorneys, Congressmen, Presidents to receive perks from vendors, lobbyists, PAC's, "political donations" (which are actually bribes in disguise--why would anyone give $50, 000 to a political candidate--they expect a favor later on worth much more than the $50,000--an excellent return on their "investment" As a physician, you expect us to be available for you 24 hours a day, 7 days a week when you come in with your smoking or obesity-related illness. What is your profession ----for the record --so I can pick you apart. For information, I am NOT on Pfizer's list, nor any other pharmaceutical company--so there. These physicians are providing a service--speaking, drug studies,etc--that every other profession would pay these same individuals if they were not physicians. So what is the difference?

every other profession

So when are doctors and lawyers going to become professional businesses instead of "practicing"?

you expect us to be available for you 24 hours a day, 7 days a week when you come in with your smoking or obesity-related illness.

You expect warranties/guarantees with any products or services you purchase but refuse to give one in your "practice".

Because other groups are unethical and accept bribes makes it okay for your group to also be unethical?

Thinker.............think harder. Our congressmen have assured us that money they receive from lobbyists and industries DO NOT influence their votes. So if they receive this "present" for doing nothing at all and just existing, why would you question money that a drug company gives to doctors to give speeches and test drugs?

Many in this country would say it is the job of the drug companies to test their own drugs and not rely on the government: "less and smaller government" So who is supposed to test the drugs before we take them if not doctors and drug companies??????

Think about that! Or just take homeopathic drugs that are diluted a couple of million times with water and try those on cancer and high cholesterol if your lettuce diet doesn't do it for you.

practicing is just a term. also if medicine was so straight forward---why don't we just have computer programs to diagnose and treat--they have tried it--it just doesn't work

that's why most physicians are 28-34 years old before going into practice

What is your profession?

Exactly--the major pharmaceutical companies take a significant amount of their profits and put them back into the company for R&D--the strict generic companies--are there to mop up the profits by simply making the drug and selling it---have you ever heard these companies developing new drugs?? So when these people want an innovative drug for their cancer---don't hold your breath for the generic companies to make it. An analogy is how much you pay for Microsoft software--100's of dollars for a disk that can be made for pennies--you are paying for the miiions of lines of software and the testing. Do anyone honestly believe that physicians should receive $0 compensation for the massive amount of paper work required by the FDA for clinical trials. A bigger concern and outcry should be enlisted against the defense contractors for substantially raising their price for fighter planes--the latest example being $110 million after the initial bid was markedly lower--that's what I want to be--fighter plane manufacturer--bid low, win the contract, and years later substantially increase the price--when you are the only guy left to build the planes--how can this happen--money to our Congressmen--how else

take a significant amount of their profits and put them back into the company for R&D-.....An analogy is how much you pay for Microsoft software--100's of dollars for a disk that can be made for pennies--you are paying for the miiions of lines of software and the testing.

And significant amounts of their profits into their wallets. How is it they can pay their CEO's such horrendous pay and benefit packages and also make Bill Gates some of the wealthiest people in the world?

Thank you for the comment. I fear that reason will continue to be exploited for national emotion, and we will lose our wonderful drug innovation. I especially do worry because I know the national subisidies for 'free' routine cae, will come at the cost of those who bought insurance for catastrophic care and who now need it.

I know it is the only hope for my three year (old only) child, to live into: late childhood, teens, twenties or even thirties, at this rate). But, there are so many out there who think others HAVE TO pay for their routine care, since they don't want to. God forbid they don't get their flatscreens, and new cars on time. So we are left to find solace, once we are deemed that almost all that we earned will be confiscated, while our only child of course will be sacrificed.

Global & R Thomas:

Your comments and thoughts are very accurate and too much for many to appreciate who use these boards simply to simply show their ignorance or blast Democrats or specifically our President. Most on these boards have no idea in hell how drug testing and approvals take place and how many years and millions of dollars it takes to get a drug approved for use in humans.

So if you don't want Pfizer to pay doctors to test drugs and present their findings at scientific meetings...............Just exactly what process would you like to use............no more new drugs??? OK, then don't be the first to complain when you, your child or relative needs a new antibiotic because they have an infection that is resistant to current drugs if those are what you are satisfied with.

confondus--I appreciate your comments--everybody wants to blame the drug companies--an easy target-other CEOs make just as much if not more than Pharm CEO's. As I said if these Pharm companies are ripping us off, why aren't the profits so high that the PE ratios should be 100 or 200. Compare them to the generic companies. These companies such as TEVA ??sp out of Israel , or companies out of India that think they have the right to manufacture drugs even before the patent has even ran out--Disney has better protection for Mickey Mouse--don't you dare violate this--for some cartoon character

Wait till you see how high your premiums skyrocket. Of course, you may be one of those who will get health care that others pay for. In the mean time, I would prefer that doctors test new drugs in clinical trials on real people, not rats, before I take them.

R.O. you could always refuse drugs; no one is forcing you to take them. You don't technically need anesthesia for surgeries. Certainly you can opt out of taking any drug of any variety, for any reason and let your faith 'heal you'. Go without if you are so opposed to the companies that advance medicine. They, probably like you, don't expect to work for free. And afterall, we were some of the first (behind the UK) to abolish slavery, just for this reason.

RO--so if you get your massive heart attack, and come to your local ER--make sure you tell the ER physician NOT to give you the clot-busting drug that will save your life--ask for the generic --guess what ?? there are none--too expensive for the generic companies to make. All drugs have some side effects, including Aspirin--anaphylactic reactions, gastrointestional bleeding, etc--so why not quit your aspirin if you are taking it--as you say, you can't trust the drug companies

No rational person is against the proper use of medicine. Although, you are quite right that I am very spearing in my use of it. As I see it, the least amount is the best amount. Medicines should never be rushed on to the market and used to determine what they will do to patients. Patients must be fully informed and give informed consent before being used in any experiment. Lying, bribing, hiding informtion or any other form of illegal business practise is compelling evidence of a callus depraved indifference for the health and safety of the patient. Where death results for that depraved indifference, it constitutes second degree murder.

Lying, bribing, and hiding information seems to be the cornerstone of our current adminstration.

RO DAvis:

You have no idea of how drugs are tested and approved but would like to convince people you KNOW how medicines are rushed to the market.....................name one that has not previously undergone over 10+ years of testing in animals and then in humans that MUST sign informed consent forms that are overseen by "patient advocates" in the institutions and in our government. My wife worked at the NIH in the National Cancer Institute and we KNOW what the detailed process is.................Pray tell your font of knowledge of "drugs rushed to the market" and patients who are not fully informed about the potential side effects of being involved in Phase I tests and subsequent Phases.

GlobalScaring: You are a couple of years behind the times. Awake and smell the coffee.

Confundus: Just go down the long list of drugs that have removed from the market, been found to have previously undisclosed adverse problems, information was found to have been withheld from FDA or fabricated information was submitted to FDA. That should keep you busy for a while.

Your posting is very good and informative. In fact, Early on, there were black slave owners, who bought and owned white indentured servants sent from the debtor prisons of England. Most of the freed blacks were later forced back into slavery.

Slavery, unlike the predudice that followed, and misinformation that follows to this day -- was never based on race, but only opportunity. And such a small fraction of slaves in the entire hisotry of the world have actually been black, that knowledge has been repressed, since it would not advance modern day social agendas.

It would be hard to convince anyone that the several thousands of dollars that most physicians receive from drug companies would be enough to to bribe them as you claim. There is considerable paper work mandated by the FDA. Some of the largest recipients are the major Universities. The Pharmaceutical companies spend tens to hundreds of millions of dollars just to test ONE drug. If they eventually find out that the drug has a major side effect before it is released or just after its release---they cannot recoup the monies already spent. The generic companies !) cherry pick the drugs that will make them the most money--drugs rarely used by the public don't interest them 2) Absolutely $0 of these generic companies profits go into R& D for new drugs 3) If the brand named drug companies were really ripping off the public, why aren't their PE ratios in the 100's--the generic companies in many cases are higher. If I could copy a Microsoft product and sell it for $20 instead of $250--and I could sell it to 1,000,000 costumers--I would be wealthy--but I know zero about writing software--GET IT??

I understand completely - you have been brainwashed into believing that the drug companies, as you say, spend hundreds of millions of dollars just to test ONE drug - which is simply not true. It is the lie they and the AMA have spoon-fed the general public. The testing is done and paid for, by and large, at universities - not at the drug company.

Indeed they do have to buy the patent, but that cost is incidental to the amount they can make on a non-competition drug. And you need to understand that the "new" drugs they tout as replacements for existing ones do not have to be better than the one they replace - they only to be different enough, at the molecular level, to be able to be patented.

If a new drug sells for $500.00 per month the drug company will glean approximately 75% of that sale; $375.00. Of the $375.00, 92% is profit; $345.00. If the drug is prescribed for 1 year [12 months] at $345.00 per prescription to 50,000 people they make over $200 million - off that one drug in a single year and the patents can be issued for two to seven years.

Multiply that by 100 drug types and it seems to me that they are doing quite well for themselves - over $20 billion in profit annually.

By the way - I was an "industry insider" in the pharmaceutical field and am more than well versed in the way in which these companies hold back drugs that would be beneficial until they can command a higher price, manipulate the data to skew the side effect results and pay off politicians to ease restrictions so as to permit early [premature] release of drugs. They create an atmosphere of fear by measures that, to those on the outside seem unbelievable but are, nonetheless, true. The panic of nonexistent pandemics is one of the best examples. They pay doctors to change patients from a perfectly good medication to one of the new releases simply to make the almighty dollar.

These are not the good guys. The truth of the matter is that there are certain basic areas which should not be allowed as part of the capitalist system we have developed. Those areas being public safety, health and education. A free-market system for those needs is not acceptable. It allows our citizens to become ill and keeps them uneducated.

No one would stand for a fire department that was private and responded only to those with fire response insurance - or the same for the police department or transportation departments. Why do we tolerate this for our most fundamental need - health? the same goes for education. Not providing for the education of our citizens, through whatever level they are able to rise, is also intolerable.

It all comes down to money and the simple fact that a sick, uneducated population is easier to control and provides them with fodder for their labor force.

this is why we allow illegal immigrants--but the net cost in US per year is $87 Billion-- how much is this for each tax paying citizen--wouldn't you be willing to pay $5 for a quart of strawberries--if they had good old AMERICANS pick them if they paid them enough--we still would be far ahead--unless you ate a large amount of produce. Ok say I rob a bank--then walk outside to 20 SWAT officers--I just give the money back--and they will let me go scot-free--forget it--so what gives these illegal aliens the right to continue to stay here---the Dems and republicants---they want them for their votes--signed up by groups like ACORN--so Congress line up to kiss their rear ends--but more Dems than Republicans.

The purchasing of our politicians did not stop with the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, Global. We went off the gold standard in 1971 - then, in 1974, Henry Kissinger (aw, yeah - that would be the GOP in office then, but it really didn't matter) went to the OPEC nations and said something to the effect that the United States is going to make you very rich. We are going to quadruple the price of oil but, in return, you will sell your oil only in American dollars and you will put your dollars in our Wall Street banks so they will have LOTS to loan other countries because this meant that everyone in the world wanting to purchase oil from OPEC had to do so in US dollars. Suddenly the price of oil quadrupled and the other nations didn't have enough money to buy it, so they had to borrow the money from the Wall Street banks. That put everybody around the world in debt to the Wall Street banks and that was the beginning of their control.

Now they blatantly pay off politicians to assure they are not regulated. Every nation on the face of this earth (except Argentina) is indebted to these monsters. When they tried to break the hold of those monster banks, Gordon Brown (of the UK) named Iceland a terrorist state - Iceland, for God's sake - so he could go in and pull their assets and bring them to their economic knees. Anyone who refuses to play the game is threatened with a world-wide trade embargo, so all nations (except, again, Argentina) play their game - turning over the assets of their nations to these private bankers.

REPUBLICAN, DEMOCRAT, INDEPENDENT, SOCIALIST - it hasn't made a bit of difference - they sold the people of this nation down the drain. In W's last year in office the OPEC nations decided to bring us to our knees by refusing to accept US dollars for oil - the economic collapse was the end result. They proved that we have been bought and sold and that they have the ultimate control over our country's economy.

The situation with the drug companies is no different from the educational system. The chance of someone succeeding in the 21st century without a college diploma is slim. The tax and employment law changes have made it excruciatingly difficult for small business owners to decipher and obey without benefit of the classroom. They must trust an "educated" person to handle their financial affairs - and occasionally with disastrous outcomes.

Ambition and intelligence is no longer enough. The system has been rigged in favor of those fortunate enough to be able to afford the degree. Without it you will be lucky to find a position that pays over minimum wage.

There are many, many people working in lower paying jobs because they would not sell themselves into debt vis-A-vis a student loan or accept, as some call it, a handout in the form of a grant.

No, those with intelligence and drive do NOT always succeed in this country - they are held back by their economic station - and that, in the United States, is unacceptable. Our nation feels perfectly justified in sending trillions of our tax dollars to "emerging nations" so they can provide FREE COLLEGE EDUCATIONS for their people but, we do not believe it is acceptable to provide our own citizens with the same so those at the lower end of the economic scale may stand a chance of bettering their lives.

I, for one, would rather see our citizens being educated with the tax dollars I pay rather than having the money sent to a country which may end up competing with our people for jobs.

What a shame that some people posting here have such a narrow view of their fellow human beings; absolutes as to what "those people" do or do not deserve. I urge us all to think about the natural progression of a country where natural selection (survival of the fittest) is determined by a financial statement and not by ability. That, to me, is very frightening.

Bankers have become fat on the interest made enslaving our brightest with unrepayable student loans. There have been some changes made to that system in the past few days. These changes will cut out the Wall Street banking middlemen who have grown fat from the previous student loan scam and may force them to lose out on stealing even more money from those who can least afford it. These changes are about lowering personal debt and increasing the ability of moderate income people to receive a college education. Why is it that the United States, arguably the best nation on the face of the planet, has a system in place that makes it a given that the rich can receive a college education but the working class cannot unless they become indentured servants by taking massive loans.

It has always been a way for the rich to keep the workers under control and it has been worse for minorities. An average household (husband, wife, 2 kids) with a moderate income ($60,000.00 per year) could never save enough to send both children through four years of college.

At the risk of repeating myself, it is a way for the rich to maintain control over the working class; limit them in how far they can rise. Those who control higher income jobs demand a college education. Without that, one is relegated to a far lower income - an income that insures that one's children will, also, not be able to afford college.

We are one of the few "developed" nations on the face of the planet that does not include college as part of the educational system which should be available to all, like a K through 12 education. Why do we disallow those with the intelligence and drive from succeeding in this country? Do you really believe that only the wealthy are capable of achieving great things and the others - well, they are working drones for a reason?

How many great inventions, advancements and creative ideas have been lost in our land because an intelligent kid had no way of getting the degree? We are culling the herd based on income, not ability, and that is such a shame.

I urge you to read Web of Debt; The Global Money Trap & How We Can Break Free by Ellen Hodgson Brown. It is a frightening, insightful and realistic look at how the bankers got control over our nation. It puts a face to the "THEY" we all talk about and know exists but that we can never quite put a finger on. And it shows how we can, as individuals and as a nation, break the grip of the international bankers.

One final thought. People speculate why JFK was killed. Interestingly enough - he was the last president who tried to break free from the Federal Reserve - until now. I hope Obama fares better - the power and means behind the world banking community is unimaginable, but we must find a way to rid ourselves of this parasitic, cancerous growth.

Thank you for your informed words, Global. We may not agree on all points, but the place we want to get to is the same - we simply have different paths to walk.

Horray for your comments D Appel!

Doesn't it piss you off when you find out that one of these nuclear physicists, or leaders of some dangerous middle east country received their education at Harvard, Yale, Princeton, or the London School of Economics--then find out 10, 20 or 30 years that they use this knowledge to scare the living crap out of us by threatening to blow up the world or affecting the economy or geopolitics of the world--these universities should be chastised in their purported attempts to diversify their student population. Wouldn't it be interesting to see a list of all the BAD people that these schools have turned out--and then realize it--was it really worth it

simple question--is that patient taking pills for the lung disease because he smoked 2 packs per day for 40 years--or has type 2 diabetes wit Hypertension and Lipid abnormalities--because he or she thinks it is his or her god-given right to smoke or stuff themselves to death--and then try to blame it on a genetic defect. You will not believe what the heath care costs will be when all of these obese people eventually develop Diabetes, Hypertension and lipid problems--then develop complications from each of these diagnoses--the rest of us will be paying for this under the Obama plan. Do you want to be in the same risk pool with drivers with DWI's or teenagers with 3-4 accidents already.

Industry will not hire employees as quick as Obama thinks---as they realize that the cost per employee has just gone up by several thousand dollars--so they will maximize the productivity of their current employees--if you can't keep up--you will be released--for a younger , more energetic employee that commands less salary and health care benefits will be less==just wait

amazing how physicians receiving more than $100 froM A PHARM OR DEVICE COMPANY--the writers of this are the same people who accept $$$$millions from military contractors, PAC's , lobbyist---why no public outcry--and why are these 535 excluded from the same health care bill that they wrote. Where are you libs to explain this??

Ok when you need your coronary bypass surgery, I will supply you with a Rookie CV surgeon or when you fly to Hawaii, your 2 pilots will have only a FEW thousand hours rather than 20,000. You gave us Obama with a few years under his belt--who never himself introduced a bill--like a pilot who got ALL of his training in a simulator--would you honestly fly on his plane, even though the simulator hours still count??

Where have I heard that word "transparent" before?

I used many of the Pfizer drugs because they had some of the best drugs--Norvasc, Neurontin, Lipitor--the list goes on--why not prescribe drugs that are great drugs.

Also everyone makes great waves about a drug being used "off-label" Guess what ----Prilosec was indicated only for peptic ulcer disease and not GERD--we have used the drug for years for treatment of GERD--heartburn--and helped millions of patients--this is no big deal, but if you listen to 60 Minutes or similar show, they make it look like it is a major crime--however a Pharm cannot promote a drug for off-label use--FDA rule. Another example of making mountains out of molehills.

what companies are saints--do you really think that a CEO gives a rat's ass about his employees--his goal is to not necessarily maximize his base salary, but to receive a maximal amount of stack options by placing members on his board whose compensation committee makes a recommendation to the rest of the board --in one case with United Health Care--backdating stock options to-- guess what-- coincidentally the lowest price of that stock per year--and at the same time issuing stock option valued at $159 million to 10 OUTSIDE board members--sound excessive and bought off??

just remember some simple numbers--there are approximately 700,000 physicians in the US--there are only 535 Representatives and Senators combined--just imagine how much easier it would be to 'influence" one or more of these 535 than it would be compared to the number of physicians--the PAC's and lobbyist are there for 1 and only 1 reason--trips in US and around the world at the nicest hotels--with their wives--all expenses paid.

Why not Tort Reform--these attorneys cherry pick their cases--exactly what the insurance companies are criticized for--lets put the libs in the same insurance pool with people that have at least 10 DWI's. Also instead of the plaintiff receiving only 60% with a victory MINUS Expenses--giving the benevolent attorney 40%, why not lower the amount that the attorney can receive to 10or 20%--we can calculate that they will still make a substantial income. Do you think they will quit as tort lawyers because of this--very unlikely. NO --this WILL NOT HAPPEN--because these guys pay off the politicians--sorry they give political donations--who for the most part are aslo lawyers. Our Er docs are so concerned that they will be sued, for DEFENSIVE reasons--50% of the patients who come to our ER end up with a CT scan--a fact

SeanDe-there ARE unethical docs out there--just like any other profession--but to lump us as all being unethical, is absurd--so when you become seriously ill. please call your local chiropractor, your holistic "doctor"' and not us. Its amazing how quick you will change your mind. And how can you morally allow us unethical professionals to take care of you or your loved ones--please put a easily found card in your wallet stating that you DO NOT wish an MD to provide care for you. But tell your family not to sue us--or else you will make the tort lawyers very happy.

Do you really think a donut, a cup of coffee, and a 25 cent pen will really influence us??

R Thomas: Doctors as a whole when weighed on the average are just as unethical as Politicians and Lawyers when measured across the population of the professions. You brought yourself to think to literal (black/white) about my wording. That is your propensity, not mine. If your a doctor, and I serious question if you are, then it may deflate your ego a bit to realize that not everybody is dependent on you. You talk as if you somehow hold a power over all people. Not true. We all must die sometime and I would rather die naturally then to have a vulturous, monetary seeking, ego-maniacal doctor, feed off me, and most likely - if not naturally life threatening - to see me to an end regardless.

luvenia48--wish I knew what you are referring to--i don't receive money or other perks for prescribing new drugs--in fact I prefer generics because if i attempt to prescribe a new drug that may actually be better for your particular medical condition, I will receive a call back from the pharmacy within the hour, indicating that this drug is not on the formulary--the insurance companies control the meds--not me. So I write for the generic--you are happy because the cost is much less--but I am not as I realize that this drug may not the best one for you. In fact, with many new drugs, the companies offer coupons to reduce the cost, but I don't receive a dime from the company as you imply that I do. If you don'r trust the drug companies , then why would you accept ANY prescription from a physician.

There are drug studies where physicians receive compensation --the patient is made fully aware that they are part of a study--the paper work is horrendous--but mandated by the FDA--why would anyone do this for free. Wish we could charge like attorneys--thinking about your case as i am driving home and charge as billable hours----as a physician, we call you, discuss your case with a consultant, or read up the latest literature on your case--ZERO compensation. for our time