Hell, I wish it were simply a matter of one big "pharma conspiracy". That would be an easy problem to solve.
The reality is paralyzing in its complexity, as with all issues that plague large political systems. And as our technology and means of communication advance at a faster and faster rate, it only becomes more evident how far being we are in understanding "social tech", and how intractable some of these problems are currently. We are nowhere near close to being able to tackle problems in the domain of complex social systems.
That's one of the things I like most about Goldacre - he's very calm and measured compared to many people involved in these debates.
To anyone that liked Bad Pharma: I can really recommend "Bad Science" as well, which is similar but broader. In particular it has some very interesting information about "alternative" medicine and its relationship to "big pharma". He also has a great blog: http://www.badscience.net/ and occasionally gives talks - do go, if you ever get a chance to hear him speak.
The problem you speak of is unique to the USA's backwards healthcare system that costs more for worse healthcare.
The actual book is very good and a definite read.
But this article seems to have spun it into a conspiracy theory.
This is the opposite of why I liked the book in the first place, it explains how bad(For consumers) things happen due to systems not conspiracies. Also how things are not bad, just could be much better. Many examples are how mistakes are made but then found and how people are working to stoping them happening again.
"With all of the trillions of dollars spent on drug development and drugs themselves, have you ever wondered why people don’t seem to feel better than they did back in the 1970s?"
The book for instance would NOT agree with this statement. Seriously would you want to have 70's medicine or 2014 medicine? This is crazy.