Drug Exec Tries to DEFEND Charging $763 PER PILL

originally posted by: vonclod
The drug in the OP was about 200$ before..why the increase?

Because they can...

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: vonclod
The drug in the OP was about 200$ before..why the increase?

Because they can...

Obviously..my point is, I'm not buying development cost in this case.

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: vonclod
The drug in the OP was about 200$ before..why the increase?

Because they can...

Yep. Americans are spoiled. Like CoronaFlu, the thought of pain, scares the bejesus out of us. "Doctor, I don't care what it costs, stop this _____________ I'm experiencing!"

Since most Americans have health insurance to pay most of the cost, the doctor will eagerly oblige the patient.

a reply to: LookingAtMars

Not all drugs are "born" in the USA. However they too get the same increase once they reach US soil.

In most industries when an item has been tooled and manufactured and in-demand for a long time the prices go WAYYYYY down. They do not magically rise by a couple hundred percent because ..... bonuses.

I wonder what the whole of big pharma spends a year on lobbyists?

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: AScrubWhoDied

originally posted by: Irishhaf
a reply to: LookingAtMars

I dont agree with it but as I heard one time it takes a couple billion to take a drug from idea to market, since most of the western world has legal limits on what they can charge, the US is one of the last to consider it.

Since the average drug only has about 10 years of marketability to make that money back, since everyone else says only a buck a pill or whatever they have to go to other areas to try and make that money back.

I dont like it, but there has to be some money coming in to fund the research and development.

Since the rest of the west rushed to mandate prices, we got hosed but hey europe has theirs they can continue to look down on us for funding their cheap drugs.

Not buying the "billions to market" narrative. There's likely a very good reason not a single one of these companies have ever actually published their costs.

Makes it impossible to know. Fortunately for them though, there are no shortage of "studies" that benefit them.

Despite the data not being public. Like I said, we probably deserve it.

The median cost to bring a drug to market is $1 billion...

Cost to Bring Drug to Market

In this study, which included 63 of 355 new therapeutic drugs and biologic agents approved by the US Food and Drug Administration between 2009 and 2018, the estimated median capitalized research and development cost per product was $985 million, counting expenditures on failed trials.

The data is public in that most pharma companies are publicly traded. You can easily look up the R&D expenditures on a companies SEC 10k filing.

None of this is itemized data from pharmaceuticals, though the estimates are derived from pharmaceutical data. This is why you see major variances between the studies done.

They have to get their big salaries, memberships in prestigious clubs, and their paid trips all over the world. Costs of these are going up, so the execs need to rape and plunder to get raises in what they get.

a reply to: Edumakated

Edumakated....

I understand we've had plenty of disagreements. I know where you stand when it comes to the free market, your views on regulations and beliefs in their negative effects. I get it, you may disagree this is 100% you. That's fine. Just one question. Do you believe the actions of this drug company is justified? Personally? Whether you believe they're legally right, let's put that a side. You think they're justified in just raising their prices like this? Outside of profit making?

My points:

1. Many drugs are no longer made in the United States.

2. Because of that there are "middle men" between the drug manufacturer and the consumer.

3. Because almost all American health insurance companies are publicly traded, the board of directors for each company is more concerned about profit margin to it's shareholders than it is to the consumer.

4. These middle men make deals between the manufacturer and the insurance company. They make gangbusters because there are so many sorts of medicine that things get lost in the fray. Therefore they are able to demand that insurance company pay X for X depending on many things. In that, the insurance company sends the cost to the consumer. If the consumer doesnt have any insurance (which you know, because of the ACA we are all supposed to by now right?) then they are hosed.

Bah, it's late but if a dillweed as myself can conjure rational thought about this, I am sure there are much smarter people that could do so much better.

Anyway, solutions:

1. Start making medicinal drugs in the USA again.
2. Have a national tax that takes care of people that just cannot afford insurance and have certain medical needs to be met. Mainly for catastrophic, but also for children and so on. I know there are several existing programs that vary state to state, but quite a bit of these costs are caused by poor people using the emergency rooms as their primary care and never paying the bills. It is a fact and we need to address it in a sober and caring fashion.
3. No pharma company or medical company should be allowed to be publicly traded on the stock market.
4. No medical or pharma company should be able to lobby congress. And if there is a stipulation, then it should be published as a public record and forced to be mentioned on public media for several years at a time.
5. All prices possible should be advertised on all medical websites. Period. That means, what any proceedure cost without health insurance should be listed up front and also all options for similar ailments should be listed in the same category.

originally posted by: Southern Guardian
a reply to: Edumakated

Edumakated....

I understand we've had plenty of disagreements. I know where you stand when it comes to the free market, your views on regulations and beliefs in their negative effects. I get it, you may disagree this is 100% you. That's fine. Just one question. Do you believe the actions of this drug company is justified? Personally? Whether you believe they're legally right, let's put that a side. You think they're justified in just raising their prices like this? Outside of profit making?

Look, it is business, not personal. They obviously felt the drug was worth more and hence raised the price. That is a business decision they made. You have to take the emotion out of the decision.

If you want to get emotional about it then we could also argue the price of the drug should be zero. Why was it ok at $200? Wouldn't you then argue it should be $100? Unless it is free, there is always going to be someone who thinks the price is too high.

If you feel pharma companies are gouging, then by all means launch your own pharma company and undercut the competition. In a free market, if there are excess profits being made, then competitors will quickly enter a market. So put up the cash, do the research, and launch a competing product and you can explain to your Board of Directors why you think the street price should only be $5/pill Hopefully, it will cover your costs.

originally posted by: xuenchen
This what happens when insurance companies and governments start paying for prescriptions 🤫

This is what happens when you have conflict if interest with BOTH party and BOTH party only answer to the oligarch behemoth corporations with deep pockets.

Yet i dont hear neither party and sadly including TRUMP talking about the one issue that effects everything which is conflict of interest. We cant fix anyhthing in govt as long as our congress which makes it the decisions are riddled with conflict if iinterest.


This only happens because neither republicans or democrats hold their own party accountable where they can make a difference. Instead they are to focused on the shenanigan of THE OTHER party where they have 0 ability to make a difference.

I think its more than just money from US people.
if it was just money, they would make Every one pay more.
all the world.

are they trying to bleed US to death?
or some thing else?
part of the BLM plane to destroy US.

a reply to: Edumakated

look, it is business, not personal. They obviously felt the drug was worth more and hence raised the price. That is a business decision they made.

I understand, that's your position, their choice, the way of the market. From my perspective, it's also a matter what is and isn't sustainable for current civilization and future generations. If prices for example go out of control, if trends continue to point to further inequality, the system eventually collapses and we end up with a Mexico styled economy, or something worse. We shouldn't just be considering things for the sake of capitalism. We live in a society where some sacrifices need to be made in order for there to be order, hence the reason we have police, hence the reason we've banned slavery, hence the reason we have government money put into orphaned children and their welfare. Inevitable, 'freedom' has it's limits, and it's considered reasonable from a societal stand-point. This isn't sustanable. Locking the majority of the population out from being able to function is problematic. It's not sustainable.

originally posted by: Southern Guardian
a reply to: Edumakated

look, it is business, not personal. They obviously felt the drug was worth more and hence raised the price. That is a business decision they made.

I understand, that's your position, their choice, the way of the market. From my perspective, it's also a matter what is and isn't sustainable for current civilization and future generations. If prices for example go out of control, if trends continue to point to further inequality, the system eventually collapses and we end up with a Mexico styled economy, or something worse. We shouldn't just be considering things for the sake of capitalism. We live in a society where some sacrifices need to be made in order for there to be order, hence the reason we have police, hence the reason we've banned slavery, hence the reason we have government money put into orphaned children and their welfare. Inevitable, 'freedom' has it's limits, and it's considered reasonable from a societal stand-point. This isn't sustanable. Locking the majority of the population out from being able to function is problematic. It's not sustainable.

Gee, I agree with you on this. (Slapping myself in the hand for typing this) I believe we should go to socialized medicine for the basic medical care and limit what they charge for medicines to a reasonable amount. I would never even buy stock in a Pharma company because I do not believe in the overcharging that is going on.

originally posted by: StoutBroux
The high price of prescriptions in the Unites States is why there are many Americans purchasing their prescriptions from Canada and other countries.....legally, at much lower prices.

My step father would pack us into the car and we’ll drive to Mexico for his prescriptions, lmfao. Seriously, they were incredibly cheap. It was amusing too as he was an accomplished Attorney who specialized in Criminal Law, he had the money to absolutely afford the Prescriptions, but why? It’s cheaper across the border. Think about that, that mentality in this regard existed way back than!

By the way, it was a border town called “Piedras Negras” near “Eagle Pass”.
Interesting note, “Piedras Negras” translates to “Black Stones”. Apparently there are coal mines nearby, including an active coal burning plant several miles further into Mexico.

We would also stock up on blankets, Cinnamon Crackers, Chocolate, Rice, Beans, Topo Chicos and a bevy of other Goods. We would also eat at one of those little street stalls, eating mini tacos with cilantro and onion, salsa on top with a bottle coke.

This was back in the early to mid 90s and society was much different than. I still remember while eating at one of those stalls and just looking at everything, how it compared to back at home. The smell, ambiance and general setting. It wasn’t so much as culture shock, more like, noticing the differences in development, but not in a bad way, rather an appreciation for the cultural traditional aspect of their homes, cities and overall society.



So young, those were the days.

a reply to: Southern Guardian
I hope that exec much ill will for his shameless greed. I would also like an investigation into who in congres has recieved ANY donations/contributions to their campaign in the last twenty years from this company or the executive in question. Time to shame these folks publicly, and we all know the recipients are in the plural.

originally posted by: Edumakated
.

The US subsidizes the rest of the world. The companies aren't allowed to charge market prices in Europe, so they just raise the price in the US to cover the losses in other markets.

Not tired of repeating Big Pharma propaganda?

US doesn't subsisidze the world, US just allows big Pharma and insurance company to bleed you out of your money and **** you 10 times over. How hard is it to understand that your health system is totally laughable and utterly corrupt?

originally posted by: AScrubWhoDied

originally posted by: Irishhaf
a reply to: LookingAtMars

I dont agree with it but as I heard one time it takes a couple billion to take a drug from idea to market, since most of the western world has legal limits on what they can charge, the US is one of the last to consider it.

Since the average drug only has about 10 years of marketability to make that money back, since everyone else says only a buck a pill or whatever they have to go to other areas to try and make that money back.

I dont like it, but there has to be some money coming in to fund the research and development.

Since the rest of the west rushed to mandate prices, we got hosed but hey europe has theirs they can continue to look down on us for funding their cheap drugs.

Not buying the "billions to market" narrative. There's likely a very good reason not a single one of these companies have ever actually published their costs.

Makes it impossible to know. Fortunately for them though, there are no shortage of "studies" that benefit them.

Despite the data not being public. Like I said, we probably deserve it.

I also doubt the drug companies statements about how it can take hundreds of millions or even billions of dollars to develop a drug. From my understanding and research, those statements were nothing more then propaganda written by (or for) the drug companies to make it sound completely reasonable for them to charge the sick prices they do for pharmaceuticals.

I like this. # we can all agree on.

Found some common ground today and that makes me extremely happy.

President Trump's executive order on prescription drug price transparency came with a statement "If they're ashamed of their prices, maybe they should lower them." Indeed. The partnership between Big Pharma and government needs to end. They aren't supposed to be partners.

One is supposed to be a company and the other is supposed to enforce the law and protect our rights. If they are partnered with these companies then they cant really do either legitimately.

ACA was just another windfall for insurance companies paid for by the US taxpayer with not much in return except that we can cover preexisting conditions. A drop in the bucket at best. Insurance mandates are not healthcare reform. They are bailouts for insurance companies disguised as healthcare.

originally posted by: LookingAtMars
a reply to: Southern Guardian

I have never understood how they get away with charging magnitudes more in the US, for the exact same "pill"!

Because the politicians you vote for are paid to allow it to happen.