Is that a bad thing in and of itself? How much should pharmaceutical companies be spending on marketing vs. research?
The point of the underlying John Oliver piece was how marketing money influences doctors, such as using drugs for off-label uses where there's no evidence that it's useful, and sometimes where the evidence says to not use it. It wasn't (as I recall) about the budget differences.
The point of the underlying John Oliver piece was how marketing money influences doctors, such as using drugs for off-label uses where there's no evidence that it's useful, and sometimes where the evidence says to not use it. It wasn't (as I recall) about the budget differences.