Example collocations logo

Pharmaceutical in sentence

484 examples of Pharmaceutical in a sentence

Identifying the defective molecular parts, known as the drug targets, should have made addressing the causes of disease easier, and would revolutionize the pharmaceutical sciences.
The more diversified Aurangabad cluster, in Maharashtra, is home to some of India’s largest seed companies, an active automotive, pharmaceutical, and sugar-manufacturing industry, and a tourism hub that includes the Ajanta and Ellora caves.
It is widely acknowledged that the high current level of investment in pharmaceutical research is yielding too few substantive discoveries.
At a meeting on “translational research,” a senior member of a contract-research organization – a company that provides outsourced research services to the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries – articulated the problem.
“What really frustrates us,” he commented, “is to be commissioned by a pharmaceutical company to design an early-phase trial when we know already that it is going up a blind alley.
Moreover, developing new antifungal drugs is not a priority for pharmaceutical manufacturers.
If private pharmaceutical companies are not going to invest in the development of novel or more effective drugs and new and better diagnostics, the public sector has to step in.
Developing new antibiotics is a challenge, because pharmaceutical companies seem to need incentives to conduct the required research.
And corruption American-style can result in trillion-dollar gifts to pharmaceutical companies, the purchase of elections with massive campaign contributions, and tax cuts for millionaires as medical care for the poor is cut.
After decades of research, some of the big pharmaceutical companies are raising the white flag and cutting back on efforts to develop new anti-anxiety drugs.
Rather, drugs can be used to make the exposure treatment more effective (the pharmaceutical d-cycloserine has shown some promise in this regard).
Europe retains an advantage in terms of pure science, as in the pharmaceutical industry, but emerging world-class companies, particularly in India, are increasingly able to recruit M.I.T. and Harvard graduates, while maintaining lower labor costs and thus global competitiveness.
To that end, one of our most controversial proposals was what we called “pay or play”: a $12 billion pot would be financed by a surcharge levied on the overall sales of pharmaceutical companies that were not developing new drugs.
I came to embrace this idea when I learned that many leading pharmaceutical companies often manage their price-to-earnings performance by buying back their own shares, thereby reducing the number of outstanding shares in the market.
But if pharmaceutical companies are using buybacks to boost executive compensation while avoiding investments that could lead to far-reaching societal benefits, then something is wrong.
Since proposing a pay-or-play scheme for the pharmaceutical industry, I have come to think that the same principle could be applied more broadly in business.
So, too, can companies that commit to providing the necessary diagnostic technology at an affordable price, or pharmaceutical companies that support such technologies as a complement to new gram-negative antibiotics, which will have to be set at a higher price to discourage overuse.
Which pharmaceutical company will be the Volvo or Tesla of its industry?
So far this decade, however, three US-based pharmaceutical manufacturers have already spent more money buying back their own shares than would be needed to see those interventions through.
If the major pharmaceutical producers were to make meaningful investments in antibiotics research, they could vastly improve the current environment for developing new drugs.
The impact of this user intelligence has been profound: in 2003, one pharmaceutical company revised its 2002 estimate of the incidence of withdrawal reactions from 0.2% to 25% (even as the manufacturer of a similar drug continues to claim that it is "not habit forming" at all).
For example, the generosity of major pharmaceutical companies, which provide medicines free of charge, has enabled treatment programs to be scaled up.
For every Apple and Google – explorers par excellence – count the energy companies with their cozy tax deals, the defense contractors that live off government budgets, and the pharmaceutical companies that buy their innovations and price what the market will bear, thanks to patents that governments grant, but without policing their holders.
But while a relatively long patent term may be appropriate for pharmaceutical innovations, which involve protracted and expensive testing, the case is less clear-cut for most other industries.
Severe shortages of life-saving drugs in Venezuela are the result of the government’s default on a $3.5 billion bill for pharmaceutical imports.
Massive military and health investments by the US government have generated a critical mass of research, which in turn attracts private funding – including from European companies, particularly in the pharmaceutical industry.
Rapid response is required of governments, United Nations agencies, regulatory authorities, and the pharmaceutical industry for coordination, surveillance, and vaccine production.
The good news is that NTDs can be treated, as quality drugs – donated by the major pharmaceutical companies – are made available.
You have probably never heard of many of the pharmaceutical companies – Serum Institute of India, Bharat Biotech, Biological E, China National Biotec Group, and Bio-Manguinhos, to name just a few – that have become some of our most valuable partners in global health.
Now there are five suppliers, and Biological E, an Indian pharmaceutical company, announced earlier this year that it would offer the vaccine for just $1.19 per dose.
BackNext