David King
the size of the market for homeopathic remedies doesn't amount to a hill of beans compared to the amounts involved in the allopathic drug industry.
Big Pharma spends twice as much on marketing as R&D.

They pay money directly to allopathic doctors to give "educational" seminars on their drugs. They advertise directly to patients. They sponsor "awards" and "prizes" to allopathic doctors that promote their wares. They give free trips and gadgets to quacks who prescribe enough of their favoured products.

The new book "Cultural Dwarfs and Junk Journalism" details some of these facts.

Until it is proved otherwise homeopaths must assume that the concerted attack against us is funded, perhaps secretly, by Big Pharma.

Hi, sorry to join in again but I actually did a small blog post on this the other day. While I think it is awful that big pharma spend so much on marketing I was even more shocked that Boiron, a big homeopathic company, spend 18.5 times as much on marketing as they do on research. That really puts the twice as much Big Pharma spend in perspective.

toodle-pip

Hi toodle-pip,
In the field of homeopathy, no one has been trying to make a lot of
money off of new medicines; the cost both to buy and to develop the
remedies is small, and our materia medica does not change much.

Altho we do have a need for conducting more provings--and perhaps this
is a field that the pharmacies should be underwriting to some
extent--our "old" remedies continue to be our mainstays, and continue
to be serviceable. The bulk of work done in developing new remedies is
done by volunteers (nowadays mostly homeopaths and homeopathy
students), under trained guidance who are apt to also be volunteers.
The reason this process has worked, is that it is part of the
*training* to be a homeopath, and a fascinating one which has personal
meaning to the people involved. It does not require the type of input
(time, training, equipment, patents, safety trials, etc.) that
developing new pharmaceutical drugs does, and does not carry the risks.

Maybe it would be a good thing if the mainstream pharmaceutical
companies were to spend less on developing new drugs to do jobs that
are already being done alright by older drugs, and let the prices come
down, and learn to make better use of the drugs they have already
developed, and which already have well-recognized risk and safety
factors. Instead, "mainstream" medicine is driven by a constant search
for newer medicines which can profitably replace those whose patents
are expiring. Now really, is *that* process in the interests of the
patients? Does not seem to be.
Shannon

On Jan 6, 2008, at 11:27 AM, homeolist (AT) otherhealth (DOT) com wrote:

>
> edouard;77877 Wrote:
>> David King
>> the size of the market for homeopathic remedies doesn't amount to a
>> hill of beans compared to the amounts involved in the allopathic drug
>> industry.
>> Big Pharma spends twice as much on marketing as R&D................
>>
>> Until it is proved otherwise homeopaths must assume that the concerted
>> attack against us is funded, perhaps secretly, by Big Pharma.
>
> Hi, sorry to join in again but I actually did 'a small blog post on
> this the other day' (http://tinyurl.com/26tyn6). While I think it is
> awful that big pharma spend so much on marketing I was even more
> shocked
> that Boiron, a big homeopathic company, spend 18.5 times as much on
> marketing as they do on research. That really puts the twice as much
> Big Pharma spend in perspective.
>
> toodle-pip
>
>
> --
> gimpyblog
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> -
> gimpyblog's Profile: http://www.otherhealth.com/members/gimpyblog.html
> View this thread: RE: Gimpy: Merely a troll
>
>

On Jan 6, 2008, at 11:27 AM, homeolist (AT) otherhealth (DOT) com wrote:

> [...] While I think it is
> awful that big pharma spend so much on marketing I was even more
> shocked
> that Boiron, a big homeopathic company, spend 18.5 times as much on
> marketing as they do on research. That really puts the twice as much
> Big Pharma spend in perspective.

It would be fun to compare those numbers--how much "big pharma" (or any
medium-sized pharmaceutical company) spends on research, and spends on
marketing; versus how much Boiron spends on each. toodly-pip, did you
by any chance get numbers?

Hi Shannon this is a discussion that might be better had on my blog.

As an owner of a tiny bit of Boiron stock (it's AFAIK the only openly traded
homeopathic manufacturer and so I put my little bit of money where my mouth
is,) I am very glad they advertise.

Why, in view of their product, would they want to do mega-research? The
research has been done over 200 years; Boiron just needs to manufacture
conscientiously and try to get the word out about the safety and benefits of
homeopathy.

Of course, if Boiron makes combos they might need to do research; I am
hoping they only, or at least mainly, manufacture the wonderful blue tubes
and ointments I am familiar with from living in French-speaking countries
most of my life.
Teresa (Northern VA)

-----Original Message-----
From: homeopathy-bounces (AT) homeolist (DOT) com
[mailto:homeopathy-bounces (AT) homeolist (DOT) com] On Behalf Of
homeolist (AT) otherhealth (DOT) com
Sent: Sunday, January 06, 2008 12:28 PM
To: homeopathy (AT) homeolist (DOT) com
Subject: [H] RE: Gimpy: Merely a troll


edouard;77877 Wrote:
> David King
> the size of the market for homeopathic remedies doesn't amount to a
> hill of beans compared to the amounts involved in the allopathic drug
> industry.
> Big Pharma spends twice as much on marketing as R&D................
>
> Until it is proved otherwise homeopaths must assume that the concerted
> attack against us is funded, perhaps secretly, by Big Pharma.

Hi, sorry to join in again but I actually did 'a small blog post on
this the other day' (http://tinyurl.com/26tyn6). While I think it is
awful that big pharma spend so much on marketing I was even more shocked
that Boiron, a big homeopathic company, spend 18.5 times as much on
marketing as they do on research. That really puts the twice as much
Big Pharma spend in perspective.

toodle-pip


--
gimpyblog
------------------------------------------------------------------------
gimpyblog's Profile: http://www.otherhealth.com/members/gimpyblog.html
View this thread: RE: Gimpy: Merely a troll

How do I do that? Is that thru Otherhealth?
Shannon

On Jan 6, 2008, at 1:34 PM, homeolist (AT) otherhealth (DOT) com wrote:

>
> Hi Shannon this is a discussion that might be better had on my blog.
>
>
> --
> gimpyblog
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> -
> gimpyblog's Profile: http://www.otherhealth.com/members/gimpyblog.html
> View this thread: RE: Gimpy: Merely a troll
>
>

SHannon my blog is here
gimpy’s blog

Theresa, I find your post very interesting. Why do you hold Big Pharma up to a higher standard than Boiron? Why should Big Pharma spend so much of it's income on research but not Boiron? I don't think the argument that all the research has been done holds much water as nearly every research paper on homeopathy ends with a statement insisting more research needs to be done. There are so many unanswered questions regarding homeopathy, even from an unsceptical viewpoint, homeopaths do not know how information is transmitted and amplified between dilutions for example.

You don't notice that I spell my name without an H? Why should I answer
something that does not have my correct name on it?

But since you ask: Big pHARMa harmed me for years with anti-depressants that
did no good and brought them, via my insurance, lots of dough, megabucks,
aka $$. Admittedly, some of the tranquilizers (used as sleeping pills and
prescribed liberally by all the psychiatrists I saw) did do good--I could
not sleep without them when in a bout of "profound insomnia", the worst
symptom of my Bipolar II.

On the other hand, I tried (at my psychiatrist's behest) one single pill of
the most recent non-OTC sleeping pill, the one with the butterfly in the
ads--I have suppressed the name, thankfully. I blacked out for a number of
hours and felt AWFUL afterwards. Would not even try the second one in the
free advertising package. Wrapped it carefully and threw it in the trash.

Now, thanks to an excellent homeopathic practitioner, I
have been off such trash for a year. I am grateful beyond words. t

PS
BTW, you wrote "it's" (see below); make that, its [without the
apostrophe--can't you even do English grammar? "it's" means it is!]


****Theresa****, I find your post very interesting. Why do you hold Big
Pharma
up to a higher standard than Boiron? Why should Big Pharma spend so much of
****it's income**** on research but not Boiron? --
gimpyblog

Shannon
There is no point in debating with Gimpy, he refers to homeopathy as "Big Quacka", his mind is made up.

If the people of the world are to know about the benefits of homeopathy then Boiron and other companies need to spend a lot to counter the nefarious propaganda of Big Pharma.

As for more trials, homeopathy really only shines in an individual personal setting, not in clinical trials which are designed to highlight allopathic remedies. When homeopathy, despite having the odds stacked against it, does well in clinical trials, they skeptics scoff and refuse to accept the results. So what is the point?