Tackling social issues typically isn't profitable in terms of short term quarters, so pill prescriptions it is.
Again, I have to ask: what, from the perspective of individual patients and care providers, is your alternative? You can't prescribe someone with low pregnenolone some friends or a better society any more than you can prescribe "having avoided allergens" to someone currently suffering from anaphylactic shock. You can tell them to do that going forward, to be sure, but it would be irresponsible not to treat patients with the quickest and most reliable means available, particularly when faced with ongoing risks of dangerous sequelae. Drugs may be offensive to you for being profitable, but they're profitable because they're more effective and faster than complaining.
Plus which, while drug prices are a gigantic problem with the American health care system, medical research isn't one of the causes, except in the trivial sense that if drugs didn't exist we couldn't sell them. Surely the problem is that poor people
can't have the drugs they need, not that rich people
can, all edgy posturing aside. Yes, FDA approval is too expensive. Yes, courting doctors is profitable and can also lead to overperscription. Yes, hospital chargemasters are insanely inflated. All those things can and should be addressed, but none of them are the fault of academia -- and while there are problems with how academic medical research is incentivized, an American preference for effective medicine is not one of them.
Nobody's making you take the pills, though, so if you really want to screw Big Pharma out of all the profit you can, you're absolutely free to switch to organic homeopathic vegan open-source sustainable free-range placebos.