The prescription drug circle jerk

I agree, Au. What we need is not a selective plan for the reduction of drug costs for some, but an across-the-board, fair drug cost regulation plan. Of course we know why this isn't happening....

Which is why I plead for an across-the-board campaign finance bill + serious regulation of corporate lobbyists.

I seem to recall general price controls in the Nixon administration. If memory serves, it was a total disaster. Why would price controls on drugs be different.

Tartarin


I agree with you however can you expect them to kill the goose that lays the golden egg. In particular their golden egg.

Roger
Price controls on prescription drugs are in force around the world and apparently work. There is no reason why they should not work for us that is unless our government in collusion with the drug companies undermines the effort. Take a lesson from our neighbor to the North.

Well, okay. By the way, are lots of new drugs being developed "up north?" On a comparative basis, I mean.

Yes. Lots of pharmaceutical research and development happening here. It's one of our biggies. We're not quite Switzerland, but pretty famous for our pharmaceuticals r and d.

My wife is a marketing manager for a U.S. pharmaceutical company. How does it make you feel to know that many of the drugs we sell to foreign countries are priced up to 10 times less than what we pay for them in the U.S? I understand that some of these countries have a different standard of living, but it's rediculous. The citizens of the US are paying for all of the research that these US companies are doing. Let's take care of our own first!

Hey Brian,
it's not the research but the profit margin costing the big bucks. Most of the research done up here is done in Universities and Hospitals with a healthy chunk of the r&d cash coming from the government.
It's CEO's and other high priced executives of big drug companies who make astronomical money jacking up the price. R&D budgets usually pale by comparison.

Thanks,
Ceili

House Approves Bill Easing Imports of Less Expensive Drugs

By SHERYL GAY STOLBERG

[]ASHINGTON, July 25 -- In a major defeat for the pharmaceutical industry, the House voted by a wide margin early this morning to approve a measure that would make it easier for Americans to import inexpensive prescription medicines from Canada and Europe.
The vote, 243-186, came shortly before 3 a.m., after a fiery hour-long debate that capped a long and stressful day for lawmakers, who are rushing to finish their business by tonight so they can leave the Capitol to start their month-long summer recess.
The outcome was a surprise. Until the last minute, lawmakers on both sides were saying the vote would be too close to call. Even as the votes were being cast, some lawmakers held back, to see which way their colleagues were voting.
"I think this is the Congress saying, ‘We hear you, drug prices are too high," said Representative Jo Ann H. Emerson, Republican of Missouri, who forced the vote by extracting a promise from the House leadership in exchange for favoring a broader Medicare prescription drug benefit that is a high priority of the White House. She added, "It's time we stopped subsidizing the world and bring fairness and fair prices to Americans."
This statement says it all ""The issue is not safety, my friends," said Representative Rosa DeLauro, Democrat of Connecticut. "The issue is price. It is time that this Congress stop acting as a wholly-owned subsidiary of the pharmaceutical companies and step up to its responsibility to the consumers of this nation."



http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/25/politics/25DRUG.html?th

I disagree. That may be the situation in Canada but it's different here. There is little competition here and the drug companies know it. Also, US companies know they can't sell their products at high prices in other countries so they keep them low to remain competitive, and then make up the difference with the US customers. While it's always fun to put blame on CEO's and their salaries, their salaries are not in the 100's of billions of dollars and are not the cause for prescriptions drug costs to be way out of control. I think this is a simple competition thing or lack thereof, and also lack of regulation that keeps Americans from getting screwed. Americans are being taken advantage of by American companies.

Such a thing cannot be fair by definition, since it restricts the manufacturers in their right to define prices of goods they manufacture. R&D preceding creation of the new medicine is very expensive thing, and it is reflected in the price of the medicaments. The pharmaceutical companies are businesses and not charities, and they cannot be forced to sell their products without gaining profit. IMO, when the life saving drugs are mentioned, the prices should be subsidized by the state or federal budget for the needy patients that cannot afford themselves expensive comprehensive medical insurance plan.

steissd
Fair play is fair play. Other countries set price controls on prescription drugs. In fact it would seem that only the citizens of the US pay full price. The excuse being that someone must support the research and development costs. My question is why must the costs be borne by the citizens of the US alone. Everyone benefits from the development of new and upgraded drugs.

We have had price controls in the past. Obviously I'd completely disagree with Steissd. Au makes a good point. But above all, there is nothing sacred about unlimited profit. We've have always had a system in this country which plays capitalism and socialism off against each other.

The needle has swung strongly towards capitalism in the past twenty years or so, creating an enormous gap between rich and poor and (most unfortunately) giving a whole generation of young Americans the notion that they can having anything as long as they can pay for it. You can't have a society which is fair and sustainable under those circumstances. Such a society is a breeding ground for anger and resentment and instability.

So we try to find a middle ground. Works for me. Seems civilized. I'm responsible for more than just myself -- I'm responsible (as we all are) for helping to preserve the dignity and comfort of all those in my community. Obviously if some of them have to get on an undignified "needy" list just so pharma can continue to charge what it wants, good sense tells me to go after pharma and seek equity.

Simple as that.

The drug companies should be allowed a decent profit. But, they are more like grave robbers than honest business concerns. Most of the drugs they are producing are aimed at symptoms instead of cures, have unacceptable side effects and are driven by greed, not good science, in the main. Sure, there have to be exceptions, but I'm damned if I could name one.

I work in the pharmaceutical industry, and I have a love/hate relationship with it.

There is good, and there is bad. It's not really altogether solely the fault of the industry, nosirree, it goes quite a bit further. The very structure of the capitalist society makes it so that the pharmaceutical industry will always be as it is.

In short:

supply <-----> demand

It costs about $800,000,000 US dollars and 10 years to bring a drug to market because of clinical trials, etc...

And that, truth be told, is really the root of the problem. If it didn't cost so much to bring a drug to market, everything else would be much cheaper, right.

What this means is that companies *need* to recover that cost, and what that means is they will NOT develop drugs that cure. The perfect drug for pharmaceutical companies is one that you take at least once a day for the rest of your life, and one that has a statistically measurable outcome that is easily manipulated.

As the large pharmaceutical companies lose patent protection on their blockbusters, and with fuckall in the pipeline, you're going to start seeing a lot more vaccinating against all sorts of [idle] threats thus price control or not merely fueling the uninformed into spending.

So it's really a toss up.

Wenchi (welcome, by the way!) -- but is that all for clinical trials for a single drug? How much is spent on marketing and lobbying?

wenchilina
I do not dispute the costs of research and development. My dispute is with the premise that most if not all the costs for R & D must fall upon Americans. The cost should and must be shared among all users. In addition I give lie to the claim that the high costs are all associated with R & D. Not after seeing the profits racked up by the industry.

"Not after seeing the profits racked up by the industry."

Exactly. See Merck. Look at the eagerness of investors when it comes to new bio-tech firms. The pharmaceuticals are raking in enormous profits and no, I don't believe that unlimited profits are either healthy or appropriate.

The public is still taking a fing. Since most of their products are not really even real medicine, but someting to keep you taking more, there is plenty of cause for regulation. Of course, first, someone needs to regulate the government and capitalism in general (not put them out of business).