Lilly was once a great research organization

[Theaxeman]

I joined Lilly in 1996 in the alternate synthesis group of Chemical Process R&D – John Lechleiter’s old department as a matter of fact. The work being done on my first project was truly cutting edge – to synthesize a clinical lot of a natural product, 31 chemical steps, few organizations in the world could even attempt such a feat. Twenty two scientists and engineers on this project, two universities, all working together to pull it off and we did it. New drugs from Lilly were getting approved often in the 90’s as we were still reaping the fruit of an imaginative and creative Discovery team from the 80’s and before. Researchers that were allowed to follow entire lifetimes of work in a certain area, to explore, to create. But the Project Managers and their timelines, the milestones, the forced regimentation of scientists into a cookie cut form of research – to help of course, and rewarding upper management with numbers of milestones met and not drugs launched. Molecules sent to the clinic not because the team thought they were good enough, but because another milestone was reached and the managers met their goal. And once the goal was met the team was dissolved, another team was created, and another poor clinical candidate created so that milestones could be met. The fruit of THAT effort started to pay off at the turn of the century; drugs were launched to be sure, but they were dogs (Xigris, Prasugrel). Cialis was good, but not a product of our research – purchased from a small organization that focused on science and not BS. The pilot plant closed, Greenfield and Tippe was sold off, the Lilly Clinic closed, Discovery and Chemical Process R&D were gutted and the researches that were kept were converted to managers that sit at computers all day outsourcing the work and dreaming of the day when they hit 80 or 90 points so they can retire from this mess -- such a shame.

 

[Anonymous]

Indeed, the feckless idiocy that rewarded the creation of a powerpoint template or chairing a useless sub-committee over the invention of drugs and creativity...which is key to inventing drugs! Squandered chemistry talent, by the most laughable excuse of a waste of protein know to pharma. And look at the results of it all. Now that I am, thankfully, gone, I can look back and laugh as the titanic circles the commode, wondering: "Who WAS the Mad$htter of Bldg 48?"

 

[Anonymous]

I joined Lilly in 1996 in the alternate synthesis group of Chemical Process R&D – John Lechleiter’s old department as a matter of fact. The work being done on my first project was truly cutting edge – to synthesize a clinical lot of a natural product, 31 chemical steps, few organizations in the world could even attempt such a feat. Twenty two scientists and engineers on this project, two universities, all working together to pull it off and we did it. New drugs from Lilly were getting approved often in the 90’s as we were still reaping the fruit of an imaginative and creative Discovery team from the 80’s and before. Researchers that were allowed to follow entire lifetimes of work in a certain area, to explore, to create. But the Project Managers and their timelines, the milestones, the forced regimentation of scientists into a cookie cut form of research – to help of course, and rewarding upper management with numbers of milestones met and not drugs launched. Molecules sent to the clinic not because the team thought they were good enough, but because another milestone was reached and the managers met their goal. And once the goal was met the team was dissolved, another team was created, and another poor clinical candidate created so that milestones could be met. The fruit of THAT effort started to pay off at the turn of the century; drugs were launched to be sure, but they were dogs (Xigris, Prasugrel). Cialis was good, but not a product of our research – purchased from a small organization that focused on science and not BS. The pilot plant closed, Greenfield and Tippe was sold off, the Lilly Clinic closed, Discovery and Chemical Process R&D were gutted and the researches that were kept were converted to managers that sit at computers all day outsourcing the work and dreaming of the day when they hit 80 or 90 points so they can retire from this mess -- such a shame.

Learn your history: Lilly and other drug companies were NEVER great research organizations. Look at the facts. People don't live longer. OK, maybe a few years. But, in general, the world is more crazy than ever, and people are still not in good shape mentally and physically. These drugs don't help.

As a former rep, I can tell you that I never go to the doctor or take pharma. pills. I have see what these people and these products are: useless. Eat right, get a little sweat going, and sleep well, and you will have a good life.

 

[Theaxeman]

Learn your history: Lilly and other drug companies were NEVER great research organizations. Look at the facts. People don't live longer. OK, maybe a few years. But, in general, the world is more crazy than ever, and people are still not in good shape mentally and physically. These drugs don't help.

As a former rep, I can tell you that I never go to the doctor or take pharma. pills. I have see what these people and these products are: useless. Eat right, get a little sweat going, and sleep well, and you will have a good life.

A former rep? What research have you ever done? How many patents do you have? You know nothing except what you have been told. BTW, if you get cancer, just forget the drugs and do your eating right and sweating since all of these products are worthless.

 

[Anonymous]

Buffy, the Warrior/Cheerleader/PharmSales-bot.

There's a reason why what few remain are routinely referred to as PrescipTeases and PharmaS$luttz.

 

[Anonymous]

Buffy, the Warrior/Cheerleader/PharmSales-bot.

There's a reason why what few remain are routinely referred to as PrescipTeases and PharmaS$luttz.

As a rep... How embarrassing that previous post... #1 reason this job has been minimized to what it's become... We stopped hiring for intellect years ago and it's why physicians don't feel we provide them any value! With people like that representing the industry HCP's really should attend any CME they can and read every peer review journal, because most reps today can't provide them any factual, unbiased, beneficial information that will help them make better decisions for their patients!

 

[Anonymous]

Leadership matters!

 

[Anonymous]

Leadership matters!

and lilly has none

 

[Anonymous]

So do smart reps and reps who have a good medical education background. And reps who are physically strong enough to carry a bag or briefcase while they make calls and not have to depend on a wheelie. Reps with exercise dynamics or fashion science degrees simply are not fit to be effective pharmaceutical reps--it must be tough for those prescribers who still see those airheads and hope to learn something useful from them.

 

[Anonymous]

So do smart reps and reps who have a good medical education background. And reps who are physically strong enough to carry a bag or briefcase while they make calls and not have to depend on a wheelie. Reps with exercise dynamics or fashion science degrees simply are not fit to be effective pharmaceutical reps--it must be tough for those prescribers who still see those airheads and hope to learn something useful from them.

The most important "sales" degree is a B.S.-- Boobs on Stripperpole. How sad, but true!

 

[Anonymous]

The most important "sales" degree is a B.S.-- Boobs on Stripperpole. How sad, but true!

It has to be the most ODD "sales" job around.
Wish I never got into it, and glad I left.

If you want a real sales job, one where you are judged on your results, then don't go to pharma....

its helps to repeat it, because some people are still convinced that this is a sales job.

 

[Anonymous]

Learn your history: Lilly and other drug companies were NEVER great research organizations. Look at the facts. People don't live longer. OK, maybe a few years. But, in general, the world is more crazy than ever, and people are still not in good shape mentally and physically. These drugs don't help.

As a former rep, I can tell you that I never go to the doctor or take pharma. pills. I have see what these people and these products are: useless. Eat right, get a little sweat going, and sleep well, and you will have a good life.

Sir you are correct, but miss something here: Some people need a reason to change and the drug ads say, "this will help you get more exercise and sweat and feel better and you won't need any Viagra or Cialis" --- right?

 

[anonymous]

Stock is on a roll
Great strategy to buy preclinical compounds from outside. It's much cheaper for people at a desk to find valuable drug candidates. Virtual research rocks.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
INDIANAPOLIS, Dec. 14, 2018 /PRNewswire/ -- Eli Lilly and Company (NYSE: LLY) today announced an agreement with Hydra Biosciences to acquire all assets related to Hydra's pre-clinical program of TRPA1 antagonists, part of the Transient Receptor Potential (TRP) family of ion channels, that is currently being studied for the potential treatment of chronic pain syndromes.

"At Lilly, we are committed to developing new treatment options for people struggling with chronic pain," said Mark Mintun, M.D., vice president of pain and neurodegeneration research at Lilly. "Through the acquisition of this promising pre-clinical program from Hydra, we will advance our understanding of the TRP pathway in pain signaling, and will seek to initiate clinical studies in the near term."

"We are very excited to be transitioning this program into Lilly, given their depth of experience in drug development and commercialization," said Russell Herndon, Hydra Biosciences president and chief executive officer. "Because of Lilly's commitment to finding novel treatments for chronic pain, we can't think of a better organization to advance these assets."

 

[anonymous]

I joined Lilly in 1996 in the alternate synthesis group of Chemical Process R&D – John Lechleiter’s old department as a matter of fact. The work being done on my first project was truly cutting edge – to synthesize a clinical lot of a natural product, 31 chemical steps, few organizations in the world could even attempt such a feat. Twenty two scientists and engineers on this project, two universities, all working together to pull it off and we did it. New drugs from Lilly were getting approved often in the 90’s as we were still reaping the fruit of an imaginative and creative Discovery team from the 80’s and before. Researchers that were allowed to follow entire lifetimes of work in a certain area, to explore, to create. But the Project Managers and their timelines, the milestones, the forced regimentation of scientists into a cookie cut form of research – to help of course, and rewarding upper management with numbers of milestones met and not drugs launched. Molecules sent to the clinic not because the team thought they were good enough, but because another milestone was reached and the managers met their goal. And once the goal was met the team was dissolved, another team was created, and another poor clinical candidate created so that milestones could be met. The fruit of THAT effort started to pay off at the turn of the century; drugs were launched to be sure, but they were dogs (Xigris, Prasugrel). Cialis was good, but not a product of our research – purchased from a small organization that focused on science and not BS. The pilot plant closed, Greenfield and Tippe was sold off, the Lilly Clinic closed, Discovery and Chemical Process R&D were gutted and the researches that were kept were converted to managers that sit at computers all day outsourcing the work and dreaming of the day when they hit 80 or 90 points so they can retire from this mess -- such a shame.

The company is a dividend machine.

 

[anonymous]

Stock is on a roll
Great strategy to buy preclinical compounds from outside. It's much cheaper for people at a desk to find valuable drug candidates. Virtual research rocks.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'd put my money on a good Google Search Analyst over an expensive chemist any day.

 

[anonymous]

I'd put my money on a good Google Search Analyst over an expensive chemist any day.

Do you think Trump will approve a drug-prescribing smart phone app?

What could possibly go wrong?

When google is enabled with a "truth filter" I will trust it.

pubmed is better, but still provides a lot of really bad "advice"

Will drug prescribing smart phone apps eliminate several layers of management and marketing at Lilly?

That is what you should be focusing on.

 

[anonymous]

Drug Discovery is difficult and it's important to keep a strong research organization to prevent revenue from declining. Raising prices to increase company revenue is not going to work forever!
Here's why many prescription drugs in the US cost so much—and it's not innovation or improvement

I'd put my money on a good Google Search Analyst over an expensive chemist any day.

 

[anonymous]

Drug Discovery is difficult and it's important to keep a strong research organization to prevent revenue from declining. Raising prices to increase company revenue is not going to work forever!
Here's why many prescription drugs in the US cost so much—and it's not innovation or improvement

"Research and development is only about 17 percent of total spending in most large drug companies," he says. "Once a drug has been approved by the FDA, there are minimal additional research and development costs so drug companies cannot justify price increases by claiming research and development costs."

costs are more expensive in the U.S. than elsewhere: Overall, the country spends twice as much as its peers, yet it gets poorer results.

 

[anonymous]

"Research and development is only about 17 percent of total spending in most large drug companies," he says. "Once a drug has been approved by the FDA, there are minimal additional research and development costs so drug companies cannot justify price increases by claiming research and development costs."

costs are more expensive in the U.S. than elsewhere: Overall, the country spends twice as much as its peers, yet it gets poorer results.

That's because in the U.S. pharma's senior leadership teams make tens of millions for their unproductive ideas, while little is spent, in comparison, on those who actually do the research.