Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Drug prices should be based upon what it takes to recover development expenses, including research, testing and the approval process and make a profit in the time frame allowed until it becomes generic.
You want cheaper drugs in the U.S.? Expand the time where they are protected for exclusivity from 5 or 7 years to 20 years exclusivity from the day of approval, not from the "invention" of or filing date.
Drug companies are already skirting this by making very minor changes to a drug and then re-patenting it.
I have a concern with drug companies charging high prices on drugs.
I have a bigger concern when the govt sets price controls in the private sector.
So, in essence, despite your concerns business gets to charge whatever its wants. Even for products that might have a life-saving quality?
I believe that pharmaceutical companies have to make a fair rate of return to stay in business. I don't accept the notion they should be able to charge any price at all. I can only stand the thought of so many people dying because of inability to afford their products in the richest nation on Earth before I become literally sick to my stomach.
The system we have isn't working. Instead of rattling on and praising capitalism, we need to recognize it doesn't work sometimes and adopt a regulatory structure that will attempt to fix it.
I am afraid you both have no idea how business works. Or know what a monopoly is.
Does Microsoft have a monopoly on Microsoft Word? Sure, they created it, but they don't have a monopoly in word processing programs.
A drug company that comes up with a new drug, doesn't have a monopoly in pharmaceuticals, just in the drugs they develop.
Businesses want to make the most money they can, but that doesn't mean pricing it as high as they possibly can. They can make money by pricing it so they sell more of it. When a company only has 5 to 7 years to recoup the billions they poured into R&D and the tests and trials plus make a profit (so they can have money to invest in future drugs and attract investors to create future drugs) they have to price the drugs higher. If they could spread those R&D and approval costs over a longer time they wouldn't have to price the drugs so high. They could sell more product and make a higher profit by lower prices and higher volume.
Let's not forget, the corporate penetration of our universities, and for-profit universities. Some of these drugs were researched in universities, with federal/state supplementary funding, along with tuition.
Not all drugs are developed in Big Pharma's research labs!
Let's not forget, the corporate penetration of our universities, and for-profit universities. Some of these drugs were researched in universities, with federal/state supplementary funding, along with tuition.
Not all drugs are developed in Big Pharma's research labs!
If you are talking about pharma-sponsored research - why not? There's only so much research the government can pay for - and in any event most of that is basic research, not applied. Plus the vast majority of drug candidates fail (and I actually mean vast majority) - they never get out the lab. And then the 1 that does seem to work? Years of extremely expensive clinical trials to prove its efficacy and to prove it has a level of acceptable safety. Whose gonna pay for that? Most pharma-sponsored university research goes nowhere anyway. Plus when a drug does come out - the University has at least some patent rights which means monies going back to the University.
Yea God forbid the brightest minds in Universities and Pharma corps should collaborate on anything. That's obviously a huge conspiracy.
It doesn't do much good to create lifesaving drugs which the ill can't afford.
It seems to me that medicine ought to have a moral component to it.
If there is no profit in developing lifesaving drugs, they will never be developed. If drug companies had a longer time to amortize the costs they would be more affordable.
Quote:
Originally Posted by markg91359
The system we have isn't working. Instead of rattling on and praising capitalism, we need to recognize it doesn't work sometimes and adopt a regulatory structure that will attempt to fix it.
The system we have isn't working. Instead of rattling on and praising government control and interference, we need to recognize it doesn't work sometimes and get rid of regulatory structure that keeps us from fixing it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tijlover
Let's not forget, the corporate penetration of our universities, and for-profit universities. Some of these drugs were researched in universities, with federal/state supplementary funding, along with tuition.
Not all drugs are developed in Big Pharma's research labs!
No, but something less than 8% of new drugs come out of universities that did the initial research and not all that money was government money, a good portion was from foundations.
Let's not forget, the corporate penetration of our universities, and for-profit universities. Some of these drugs were researched in universities, with federal/state supplementary funding, along with tuition.
Not all drugs are developed in Big Pharma's research labs!
Also, they spend Billions in advertising more than they spend on research and development
They also spend billions in lobbying to rig the markets in their favor.
Also, there is no consumer oriented market if the prices are not given up front.
The doctor hands you a prescription with no pricing on it and no alternative brands on it for you to choose from.
The same doctor is also is gifted by pharma sales men to pass their products on to you.
There is also the fact that the Insurance Industry will pay part of the cost for that prescription but you end up paying for that as well via increased premiums and copays.
The Pharma Industry is as far away from consumer driven as you can get.
If there is no profit in developing lifesaving drugs, they will never be developed. If drug companies had a longer time to amortize the costs they would be more affordable.
There are drugs brought to the market in other countries via R&D.
They do it cheaper even than we do here.
Quote:
The system we have isn't working. Instead of rattling on and praising government control and interference, we need to recognize it doesn't work sometimes and get rid of regulatory structure that keeps us from fixing it.
The regulatory structure was written by Big Business itself to keep their competition at bay.
A lot of the regulations in place are written by Big Business with that very facet in mind.
They want complete control and power over everyone else and they use the government to make it happen.
How do you propose we attack the lobbyists that are attacking competition based capitalism which would lower prices and be good for everyone?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
