8 replies to this topic

[Frogiegirl]

http://finance.yahoo...-172518972.html.


Just more excuses. ....

[thatguy]

It sucks, but hopefully it offers massive incentive for companies to find more effective treatments.

[chriskuo]

The article was a news report by Kaiser Health News, which is a respected and objective analyst of health care issues.

 

The excuses relate to the fact that so many Americans have contempt for any kind of regulation but complain about the results when the government is prevented from implementing regulations.

 

The anti-government types that are so predominant in today's politics should be careful what they wish for.

 

The people on this board need to vote down the anti-regulation types if they want to make a difference.  People complaining in this echo chamber makes absolutely no difference.

[scuba]

From today's Wall Street Journal:

 

http://on.wsj.com/2bBaq3D

 

The article echoes what Frogiegirl posted at the top of this thread. The WSJ article suggests that government creates monopolies in these pharmaceuticals and that's the main driver for the exorbitant prices. My own view is that in order to reverse this trend we need to reduce (not eliminate, but reduce) government control that stifles competition and innovation.

 

Steps to take:

 

1. Allow re-importation of drugs from overseas (that alone will drive prices down).

2. shorten patent protection times from the current 17-20 years to 10 or less.

3. Facilitate generic drug production and competition immediately upon patent expiration.

4. Enable faster drug development and approval outside FDA using fast tracking methods. FDA clinical trials are the most expensive part of the drug pipeline. Once a drug is approved as "SAFE", no reason to subject the same laborious process for that drugs application in other areas and diseases.

 

What we don't want is government takeover and control of the pharmaceutical industry. Artificial price setting will decrease the incentive for innovation and supply. We need the government to facilitate more competition, not less. Any government regulation that will decrease competition and innovation is what should be targeted for change. 

[chriskuo]

#1 won't work because drug companies will limit supplies sold into other countries to the amount used internally.
If drugs leak out, it would hurt the foreign patients.

Faster approval by the FDA would be helpful for innovative drugs and newly competitive generics. But that has to be done carefully. Look at what happened with the fast track approval of Iclusig/ponatinib.

The Epipen brouhaha has shown that kids with food allergies get more sympathy in the mass media than adults with cancer.

The biggest problem is that a high percentage of health care costs are paid by employers. The high drug prices are a "rational" response by the drug companies to increase their profits. Then, there is no transparency to all the discounts in the supply chain. Nobody knows who is bearing how much of the cost between employers, insurers, PBM, pharmacies, and patient.

[scuba]

#1 won't work because drug companies will limit supplies sold into other countries to the amount used internally.
If drugs leak out, it would hurt the foreign patients.

Faster approval by the FDA would be helpful for innovative drugs and newly competitive generics. But that has to be done carefully. Look at what happened with the fast track approval of Iclusig/ponatinib.

The Epipen brouhaha has shown that kids with food allergies get more sympathy in the mass media than adults with cancer.

The biggest problem is that a high percentage of health care costs are paid by employers. The high drug prices are a "rational" response by the drug companies to increase their profits. Then, there is no transparency to all the discounts in the supply chain. Nobody knows who is bearing how much of the cost between employers, insurers, PBM, pharmacies, and patient.

 

All very true ...

[Antilogical]

I agree that lack of transparency of drug costs, discounts, and actual payments allows the pharmaceutical industry to get away with setting - and hiking - prices at will.  It also gives insurance companies built-in excuses for dramatic hikes in co-pays.

Here's what I would like to see happen:
1)  Allow Medicare to negotiate drug prices, just like private insurance companies do.
2)  Allow US patients to import drugs from Canada (as a start).
3)  Reduce the patent exclusivity period.
4)  Prohibit payments by patent-holders to generic drug companies that delay the entry of generics to the market when patents expire.
5)  Somehow limit the price of drugs sold in the US by a company that is selling the same drug for much less in other markets.
6)  Require disclosure of costs throughout the supply chain for any drug costing more than XXX.  Start with drugs sold for life-long conditions.

[scuba]

I agree that lack of transparency of drug costs, discounts, and actual payments allows the pharmaceutical industry to get away with setting - and hiking - prices at will.  It also gives insurance companies built-in excuses for dramatic hikes in co-pays.

Here's what I would like to see happen:
1)  Allow Medicare to negotiate drug prices, just like private insurance companies do.
2)  Allow US patients to import drugs from Canada (as a start).
3)  Reduce the patent exclusivity period.
4)  Prohibit payments by patent-holders to generic drug companies that delay the entry of generics to the market when patents expire.
5)  Somehow limit the price of drugs sold in the US by a company that is selling the same drug for much less in other markets.
6)  Require disclosure of costs throughout the supply chain for any drug costing more than XXX.  Start with drugs sold for life-long conditions.

 

 

6)  Require disclosure of costs throughout the supply chain for any drug costing more than XXX.  Start with drugs sold for life-long conditions.

 

This is a good one - there is a big difference between short term drug need (and cost) vs. a drug serving patients with Chronic conditions in which the drug is life saving (targeted therapies of which TKI's are one). There could be a cap on how long those particular drugs can enjoy patent protection since they are likely taken for life - or some other way to drive competition and multiple vendors. 

[Buzzm1]

Most of Congress, if not all, are in the back pocket of  Big PhRMA, the #1 lobbyist in Washington DC. To see any change in drug cost policies, will require harsh action by the voters.  Until then all we will get is mostly lip service.  We have to be willing to vote them all out.  In the meantime you are encouraged to make a continuing and concerted effort to voice your displeasure to each and every member of the Congressional committees responsible for U.S. drug policy:

 

Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee http://bit.ly/11EEmWL

 

House Oversight and Government Reform Committee http://bit.ly/1L7Qek9

 

PS. Don't mince words