Pharma-Future

So I was watching TV last evening and I saw this commercial for some Midol alternative. It was clearly a Midol alternative, because the commercial described all the symptoms which, I've heard, Midol is suppose to cure. The odd thing was that it kept on comparing itself to every pail reliever other than Midol. Struck me as odd.

Anyhoo, the commercial got me thinking about pharmaceutical companies. Critics of socialized medicine, and defenders of pharmaceutical companies in general, often defend high drug prices as being necessary to stimulate innovation. If GlaxoSmithKline or Pfizer do not stand the chance of reaping great rewards, why should they funnel millions of dollars into research?
But how much of that money is being sent towards research for diseases, as opposed to the next Viagra? Why should these corporations look for cures for chronic illnesses when a suppressant is so much more profitable? As Mr. Rock once said, the money is in the medicine, not the cure.

That is not to say that the medicine is not a worthy goal. But I am beginning to worry that PharmaCo's incentives are skewed to towards curing less urgent afflictions. Like having babies or feeling anxious or staying awake. I feel like every time I turn on the TV I see that birth control commercial with the desecrated girly Twisted Sister song. Maybe I'm watching the wrong shows.
What I am wondering is what percentage of new medicines that are patented each year are for life threatening illnesses, as opposed to chronic conditions or less necessary pills. Better question, what percentages of their profits come from medicines for life threatening illnesses?

The Economist just had an article about the growing popularity of "cognitive enhancers", which typically would fall under the purview of non-necessary pharmaceuticals and are even more commonly used than the article implies. America's university system practically runs on Adderall already, especially Ivy League and other very competitive schools. I suspect that study drug use will soon become commonplace among the general population.

Would any of this change due to universal health care that covered prescriptions? It seems like the trend already is for PharmaCos to focus development efforts on drugs that may not even be covered by insurance. So how much could universal health care really change their research patterns?

I really do not know too much about health care in general, so I could be missing something really big here. Im just kinda thinking in text.