Canada has nationalized medicine system so their government
imposes a limit upon what the drug manufacturers may charge
the patient. In addition to that, the American dollar is worth
$1.50 in Canada, so the American who purchases drugs via
Canadian mail order is making out both ways. While it may
not be nearly as cheap as in Mexico - it is very helpful to
Medicare recipients with no drug coverage. MY BIG QUESTION
is - WHY won't our government impose limits on the big
drug corporations? How much are big drug corps paying to
have lobbyists in Wash DC for their interests? GlaxoSmithKliine
is trying to block Americans from purchasing mail order meds
through Canada. What GREED! Retired Americans are
boycotting all of this companies over the counter products in
response to their greedy efforts to put a stop to this ONLY
way Americans can get any relief from the unbelievable costs
of prescription drugs in the USA. The old saying goes ;
"whatever the traffic will bear" as it applies to what the
drug companies will charge. As much as they can get away
with, apparently.
High cost of American drugs
This discussion is exceedingly helpful and I am impressed with
all of the posts especially those of AU1929 and of course ehBeth
whose professional and thoughtful opinions are always worth
reading.
The keyword I looked for and did NOT see was "GENERIC" since
that is the real answer to inexpensive drugs.
When a leading drug company produces a new drug they often
offer reaearch grants to universities and independent researchers.
By the time the drug is developed, tested on animals and finally on
a control group of humans the cost might be $50 million or more.
When that drug is FDA approved and another $20 million is spent
on advertising and informing the physicians who will be prescribing
it the task of recouping their investment is a formidable one.
But it does not take many patients reporting adverse side effects to
cause the physician to not prescribe it for his next patient. Or a
similar but effective drug may have appeared which is favored due
to cost or more aggressive marketing.
In any case it might take several years for the producing company
to recoup their investment . Once done the rules of business apply
and the shareholders begin to enjoy the profits.
However, after another 5 years, during which the original
drug, say for example Raniditine, at $1 per pill or Imitrex at $15
a pill the company may have earned $100 million or more in
excess of their investment.
Does anyone really expect that or any other drug company to
suddenly offer their "golden eggs" at bargain prices? Not really.
It is at this time that another laboratory, perhaps using the
technique of "reverse engineering" which simply means deciphering
the ingredients of a drug and combining those ingredients into a
similar product under a different name may offer their product at
a fraction of the cost of the original. This is called a "generic drug".
Now this is where the lobbyists that Ehbeth mentioned appear.
These are the people in their $3000 Italian suits and Hollywood
smiles that call on the elected representatives . Their message
is smooth and brief:
" We know you care about your constituents, especially their
health. We know that you would not want any one of those
people who elected you to office to buy inferior generic drugs
that may contain impurities, that have not been tested and
which may be produced without quality control.
We hope you carry this message to your voters and we realize
that this is an onerous task for you. To help you in this task
we would like you to accept this small $50,000 addition to
your campaign for re-election fund. The cash comes out, the
handshake is like one from Cary Grant or Gregory Peck. The
lobbyist of off to the next elected official."
In Canada generic drugs are made and approved by the government
since every citizen gets free health care from the cradle to the
grave.
In one recent case (reported in the National News) patients were
charged $3200 for a drug procedure by the patent holders in
Atlanta. Since the drugs could easily be made for $500 several
clinics refused to use the higher priced regimen and produced their
own, a distinct advantage not only to the patient but to the health
care system .
Of course most of us believe in free enterprise and agree that any
manufacturer may charge whatever the market will bear. A good
example I noticed last week was a drug made by the famous
Bayer company. The price was $10 for a bottle of 100 pills.
The fine print said the active ingredient was acetacylic acid (Aspirin)
On a shelf nearby was an inhouse product containing the same
ingredient and doseage (325mg) at $1.25
Make your own choice.
BABSATAMELIA : Thank you for professional input. Very
informative and helpful, especially to
Americans able to go to Mexico.
Where I live in Canada one lady who
came from PA in a busload of patients
told me she saved $4000 last year by
crossing theborder by bus. The 48
people hire the bus and divide the cost
among them.
Again, concern must be offered for drug ID and analytical purity. Few patients have either GC or HPLC in their homes, with which to ascertain ID and purity of their foreign-bought meds.
How can they be sure the meds are what, they're supposed to be, when they're bought in either Canada or Mexico? They can't, according to US standards.
Think about all the mislabeled and misbranded drugs now being sold in the US. The latest one, I heard about was Epoetin.
Also:
While many people think that a generic version of a med is identical to a brand version, consider this:
Do you really think the Walgreen's brand of aspirin is the same as the Bayer's brand?
Walgreen aspirin vs Bayer aspirin
There is only ONE difference between Bayer and Walgreen
acetylsalicylic acid and that is the price.
In our University lab they have ground up and tested
dozens of aspirins.... all of them contain the same
ingredient, acetate esther of salicylic acid.
Haven let me ask you one question. If you owned the
lab that made any generic drug wuld you NOT want to
be sure to pass any and every test anybody would make
on your druig so that you could get repeat business?
Short shrifting would only let you sell ONCE and then some
or any graduate pharmacitical analyst would find out your
deficiency, report it in the journal and your business would be
over.
My guessis that you would be doubly careful to produce an
equal and better drug so that you and your shareholders
would prosper.
Why would you or I or any manufacturer be less ethical
than the big drug mfgrs, the ones that send their lobbyists
out with envelopes full of money to influence the policy
makers?
Your inference that generic brands are somehow less
efficacious that national brands is unfounded bias.
In the food industry for example there are, as you know
two big makers of Ginger Ale.
I've been shown and told that several generic brands use
more pure ginger and taste much better than the national brands.
I'll give you one more example. Ever hear of ALEVE?
It is a wonderful anti-inflammatory drug used for arthritic
control.
But instead of paying 8cents a tablet supposing you were
offered the same Aleve formulae for half that price and
from Wal-Mart. It's called by the generic name. Sodium
Naproxen and the WalMart brand is Equate.
Do you really think Walmart would be dumb enough not to
have their billion dollar resources make sure their brand of
Aleve would be just as good as the higher priced one?
Prescription Drugs Not Covered By Medicare
Does anyone know of an insurance policy one can buy that supplements Medicare for prescription Drugs? I am covered by United Health now but in 60 days I will be officially disabled & on Medicare. My drugs will cost over $1000.00 a month in the US. 
Is this a rip or what? - will investigate the Canadian route - I am 45 years (young) but this situation is making me old very fast. It is so not fair. I have paid taxes for 30 years literally. Thanks for imput....
**Yes that is true ehBeth - BUT, your country has a medical
system that is regulated by your government. You have a
form of socialized medicine, like the UK- right?
Consequently ... there would be NO POINT for big drug
companies to have lobbyists in your country - the Canadian
government has already stated its LIMITS and placed limits
of caps on what they will pay for a drug, for the citizens
of Canada - and they will not pay one cent more for the
drug.
**So are the big drug companies going to refuse to sell
their product - just because they get paid less?? Heck no.
They want their market, at whatever price they can get
for the drug. Essentially, with all of the big drug companies
merging over the past 10 years (meanwhile the US govt is
giving Microsoft hell to pay for the fact that no one else has
a product like the one Gates developed)
**Pres Bush has announced a desire for the FDA to lighten
up on the very costly tests the drug companies must go
through to PROVE SAFETY AND THAT IT WORKS. Now, Bush
puts a semi-positive PR spin on this big bonus to the drug
manufacturing companies ... Bush says that this is being
done in order to get much needed new drugs to people who
need them. The REAL story here is that Bush is giving big
drug companies free reign - they can get their new untested
drug out on the market without having to pass thru all of the
hoops the FDA new drug applications require. And THIS is
often the most expensive part of research and deveopment.
You also must remember that even though many big drug
corporations have their headquarters buildings in the USA
(Like US Steel - huge office building is still in Pittsburgh,
PA - but they don't manufacture steel here in the US anymore.
Another fascinating but frustrating reality is that the big drug
companies are all in on collusion wrt prices, just like your
local drugstores. It is all frightfully illegal but ignored by our
"representatives in Wash DC. Do YOU feel like you actually
have someone in politics who is on YOUR side?? It simply boils
down to whatever the drug corps can get away with - they
are permitted by OUR government to charge , And Bush
is not on OUR side.
Well hmmm... the only thing that could possibly go wrong with buying
a $10 pill that is 40mg & cutting it into
quarters, becaue the dose YOU need to take is 10mg, rather than
40mg and to do so to save costs.. would be in the realm of whether
or not the pill itself is enteric coated, meaning that it is not
supposed to dissolve until it is past the stomach, in which case
you could be doing more harm than good. OR if it is one of
those prolonged-24 hour kind of tablets, then when you cut
it open - you completely lose the benefit of the time-release
system because all of the medication is then released at once.
