Example collocations logo

Pharmaceutical in sentence

484 examples of Pharmaceutical in a sentence

For pharmaceutical firms, the development of a vaccine or treatment was not commercially attractive, and so it did not warrant investment.
Nevertheless, the fears, and especially the prospect of a new and lucrative market, set pharmaceutical firms scrambling to develop Ebola-related products, while health officials lamented that nothing had been done beforehand.
I am not criticizing pharmaceutical companies for not producing an Ebola vaccine when there was no market for it.
Whereas pharmaceutical companies lack incentives to aid the poor in developing countries, they have strong incentives to develop products for people in affluent countries.
Because the overwhelming majority of medical and pharmaceutical research is directed toward products that affect people in affluent countries, it targets only part of the global burden of disease.
Some government- and foundation-funded research addresses diseases that primarily affect poor people, but these efforts are not systematic and do not use the incentives that work well to drive pharmaceutical innovation elsewhere.
But pharmaceutical companies would have been considering such products – as well as other treatments to save lives or improve health anywhere in the world, regardless of people’s ability to pay.
What is still needed, however, is sufficient reward money – perhaps $100 million from governments, NGOs, foundations and the pharmaceutical industry – to stimulate serious investment.
It would also provide the evidence needed to go to governments, foundations, and global institutions for the much larger sums required to expand the present system of incentives that guide pharmaceutical companies’ decisions.
But we are at an early stage and face a remarkable backlash from the global troika: witness Sanders’ treatment by the Democratic National Committee, the run against Corbyn by a former pharmaceutical lobbyist, and the attempt to have me indicted for daring to oppose the EU’s plan for Greece.
Today, however, the NHS faces mounting challenges, owing to the years of “austerity” after the 2008 financial crisis, as well as to larger changes in the pharmaceutical industry’s business model.
And, worldwide, the public pays for an estimated two-thirds of all upfront costs for pharmaceutical research and development.
The pharmaceutical industry will no doubt argue that government engagement stifles innovation.
Even more to the point, policymakers need to address the financialization of the pharmaceutical industry, which is focused solely on shareholder value, rather than on all stakeholders.
Between 2007 and 2016, the 19 pharmaceutical companies in the S&P 500 as of January 2017 spent $297 billion repurchasing their own shares to boost their stock price, and thus the value of their executives’ stock options.
The US Attorney for the Southern District of New York recently accused the Swiss pharmaceutical giant Novartis of doing exactly this by providing illegal kickbacks, honoraria, and other benefits to doctors – exactly what it promised not to do when it settled a similar case three years earlier.
Indeed, Public Citizen, a US consumer advocacy group, has calculated that, in the US alone, the pharmaceutical industry has paid out billions of dollars as a result of court judgments and financial settlements between pharmaceutical manufacturers and federal and state governments.
In response, pharmaceutical companies and policymakers are looking for innovative ways to reduce these pressures, not just by developing new drugs, but also by rethinking how the industry operates.
If it is not, the pharmaceutical company refunds the cost.
The pharmaceutical firm gains as well, because the effective guarantee underpins public confidence in its products.
In the late 1980s, the leading industrialized countries – the United States, Europe, and Japan – began to push for stronger patent regimes that would boost their own pharmaceutical companies’ profits.
For example, pharmaceutical companies have insisted that the TPP force all countries to grant 12-year patents on prescription drugs – increasing their profits while delaying competition from cheaper generic versions.
Cameroonians collect African cherry bark for export to European pharmaceutical companies.
And, because antibiotics generally produce low – and sometimes even negative – returns on investment for the pharmaceutical makers that develop them, many companies and venture capital funds steer clear.
We need to nurture the next generation of academics, scientists, hospital workers, and pharmaceutical technicians.
According to the World Health Organization, the annual funding deficit for TB research and development is more than $1.3 billion, a shortfall that is exacerbated by a lack of market incentives within the pharmaceutical industry.
While the declaration endorsed at the end of the UN meeting did offer a compromise, the quandary remains: how can we guarantee access to medications – especially for the poorest patients – while maintaining funding streams for pharmaceutical R&D?Patients’ needs must always be emphasized.
The cynicism with which pharmaceutical firms have encouraged opioid drug use is appalling.
The lesson pharmaceutical companies seem to have taken from the challenges to Big Tobacco is to hide their activities better, rather than to be better.
Any effort to restrict antibiotic consumption, regulate the food and pharmaceutical industries, or change human behaviors – all strategies that are currently being discussed – will require complex ethical reflection and analysis.
BackNext