The Cutting edge or the bleeding edge ? Is new always better?

Do not prescribe newly introduced drugs unless they offer significant therapeutic advantages, are cost-effective, and are affordable. 

Drug companies routinely mislead doctors and the public about the safety and effectiveness of their drugs to increase sales. The cost in terms of bad health outcomes and avoidable deaths runs into the tens of billions of dollars every year.
 Scientific curiosity which was the driving  force of  new discoveries was maintained by a number of individuals some rich some poor just for the heck of it. 
We don’t need patent monopolies to support research.

The Bleeding Edge

2018 ‧ Documentary ‧ 1h 39m

Bayer lashed out at Netflix documentary “The Bleeding Edge,” with the pharmaceutical giant saying it presents an inaccurate picture of its Essure birth-control implant device.

The film from Oscar-nominated documentary filmmakers Kirby Dick and Amy Ziering (“The Invisible War,” “The Hunting Ground”) investigates the $400 billion medical-device industry, “examining lax regulations, corporate cover-ups, and profit-driven incentives that put patients at risk daily,” according to a Netflix description.

Bayer, in a statement issued Friday, said the film “presents an inaccurate and misleading picture of Essure by relying almost entirely on anecdotes, cherry-picking information to fit a predetermined conclusion, ignoring the full body of scientific evidence that supports the [FDA’s] determination that Essure’s benefits outweigh its risks and disregarding the appropriate warnings that accompany the device.”

Then tell me why you have discontinued "Essure" sale all over the world and at last from the USA?

"We were glad to hear Bayer’s July 20 announcement that it would stop selling Essure after 2018. Until then, we urge any woman who is contemplating Essure to be fully informed of its risks."

• Description of Excerpta Contract
  (p. 43-46, 51, 86-89)

In 1999, Johnson & Johnson had signed a contract with a company called Excerpta Medica. Its specialty was medical marketing. Its sub-specialty was producing ghostwritten, data-filled studies on the efficacy and safety of a client’s drugs, finding the right academic scholars to be listed as the authors and then placing the articles in prestigious academic journals.

Excerpta’s and Johnson & Johnson’s partnership with academics and the journals that publish them was not unusual. Over the last 20 years, research into the effects of specific drugs has become almost exclusively funded by drug companies that have an interest in the results. The government, through agencies such as the National Institutes of Health, sponsors generic research related to various diseases, but beyond that initial stage, most of the work is paid for by the pharmaceutical or biomedical industries.

In a detailed presentation to Johnson & Johnson, Excerpta outlined one of its key selling points: “Ensuring Vast Opinion Leader Access.”

“No other medical education company has the tremendous access to top opinion leaders that Excerpta Medica does … ” Excerpta promised. “Our parent company, Reed Elsevier, is the largest supplier of medical information in the world, publishing over 700 medical journals in almost every conceivable therapeutic area. Each journal has an editorial board composed of renown specialists throughout the world who are available to us as consultants, advisory board members, speakers, and in other capacities. We provide this significant access to all of our clients.” (The Excerpta connection to the giant Europe-based publisher would be severed in 2010, when it was sold to a unit of the giant advertising agency Omnicom.)

Now, in 2000, Excerpta began working on a plan to place dozens of Risperdal articles in medical journals. “Awareness articles” and “original reports,” of which a total of 39 were planned, would cost $22,000 each in fees, plus fees for the “authors.” Shorter pieces would be $9,000 each.