The first half seemed to be saying 'Drugs companies do tests against placebos. Merck is short of drugs.' Can someone who took the trouble to plough through it summarise the second half?
"But why would the placebo effect seem to be getting stronger worldwide? Part of the answer may be found in the drug industry's own success in marketing its products.
[...]
"Potential trial volunteers in the US have been deluged with ads for prescription medications since 1997, when the FDA amended its policy on direct-to-consumer advertising. The secret of running an effective campaign, Saatchi & Saatchi's Jim Joseph told a trade journal last year, is associating a particular brand-name medication with other aspects of life that promote peace of mind. [...] By evoking [...] uplifting associations, researchers say, the ads set up the kind of expectations that induce a formidable placebo response."
It also speculates that cultural differences (including the consequences of "outsourcing" testing) influence the placebo effect, and that psychiatric drugs are especially susceptible to the placebo effect ("...[a challenge] is to accurately define the nature of mental illness")
Lots of self-hoisting on petards going on in the drug business, otherwise known as the Law of Unintended Consequences. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unintended_consequence