an interesting point i ran across today

in today's papers on slate. in

Recent studies paid for by the government have shown shortcomings in the early drug company results. The WP quotes a pharmaceutical company lobbyist saying these studies should be paid for by the government because they're too expensive and would "probably bring drug development to a halt." This claim is left unexplored by the Post even though widely available data could raise questions about the assertion. In an article published by the New York Review of Books last year, Marcia Angell wrote that the combined profits of the 10 drug companies in 2002, listed in the Fortune 500, was $35.9 billion, which was more than the profits of all the other businesses in the list put together. Also, on average, the 10 biggest drug companies spent 14 percent of their total sales on research and development in 2000, compared to 36 percent on marketing and administration.

the drug companies are making a killing and they want us to believe that they need the government to pay for studies they should pay for because it's too expensive. how can you still have a straight face and say that is beyond me.