Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-10-2019, 07:12 AM
 
Location: Pyongjang
5,701 posts, read 3,220,401 times
Reputation: 3925

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by TigerLily24 View Post
Judge rules against, citing Congressional authority.

“A federal judge on Monday stopped a Trump administration initiative that would have required drugmakers to reveal the sticker price of their drugs in television ads.
...
The decision from U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta in Washington, D.C., ruled that the Department of Health and Human Services does not have the regulatory power to make drug manufacturers include the cost of drugs in television commercials.

Mehta wrote that in halting the rule, the court was not questioning its wisdom, but resting the issue on the law set by Congress in the first place.

"That policy very well could be an effective tool in halting the rising cost of prescription drugs. But no matter how vexing the problem of spiraling drug costs may be, HHS cannot do more than what Congress has authorized," Mehta wrote.“


https://www.npr.org/2019/07/09/73977...-drugs-in-tv-a
Congress needs to act immediately to help Trump here. Fancy Nancy will love this lol
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-10-2019, 07:15 AM
 
20,955 posts, read 8,666,966 times
Reputation: 14050
Uh.......most other countries in the WORLD don't allow ANY direct-to-consumer drug advertising.

If Trump wants to do something real, let him try that one!

Here is an example.

A colon check with scope cost about $1200 or more.
Cologuard (heavily advertised) is about $600 or at least a couple 100.....

A test available on Amazon for $16 (FIT #2) is rated by many docs as effective as can be...

Will the commercials tell you that?

This type of a move is typical of our system. If Cologuard advertises that it is $500, will less people get tested for colon cancer? I think most of us would want our insurance to cover $500 for such a test.

But will the commercial say "Hey, for less than $20 you can have a great test?".....of course it will not.

There is no "point" here except our entire system needs reformed and direct-to-consumer drug advertising must go out the window. I am fine with the tests being available in the local pharm or on amazon, but spending billions for marketing on TV, etc is just crazy. We all pay.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-10-2019, 07:20 AM
 
45,203 posts, read 26,421,987 times
Reputation: 24965
Quote:
Originally Posted by FatBob96 View Post
The whooshing sound you just heard was the point, flying over your head at Mach II.
I doubt you'd be able to offer a rational explanation, but go ahead and try.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-10-2019, 07:36 AM
 
Location: City Data Land
17,156 posts, read 12,953,220 times
Reputation: 33179
Quote:
Originally Posted by PullMyFinger View Post
Maybe they can forego the video of the senior citizens doing yoga on the beach during the disclaimers and just post the prices? Makes sense.
That's a great idea. Except for one huge problem. Trying to determine the cost of a drug for you personally is more complicated than calculus. I called my insurance company just yesterday to try to find out why my medicine was so expensive and how I could reduce the price. Note: I have worked in the medical field 15 years and am extremely familiar with how insurance works and even I was confused.

Me: Hi, I went to my pharmacy and I discovered my drug cost $470 this month, which I can't afford. How can I get it cheaper? Is there a way?

Aetna rep: This month you have a deductible of $X. You had no deductible last year. Pay the deductible and next month you will owe 29% of the drug cost because it is a Tier 5 drug for a total of $286.50 for 30 tablets. Once you hit the catastrophic coverage level, you will owe 25% of the cost of the drug so the price will go down to $X. However, you are using a preferred pharmacy, which is a good thing, because two months ago, you were using a nonpreferred pharmacy for your other drugs which made your cost much higher!

Me: Huh? Why was the other pharmacy nonpreferred? The service was so much better. What is your criteria for preferred vs nonpreferred? Never mind. Can I get the doctor to write an exception letter (which states the expensive drug is medically necessary and I can't use a generic) to reduce the Tier to 4 so the cost will be only $100?

Aetna rep: We don't do that anymore. You must pay the 29%. I can give you the number for financial assistance that may help you with the cost. And next year, maybe you can change to another one of our excellent Medicare plans we offer that will cover your drugs better. Etc, etc. . .

And that is the conversation for only one drug on one plan. Let's assume the cost is disclosed. What cost would it be? The retail price? The price with financial assistance? The price with Medicare? If so, which one of the Medicare plans? Or private insurance?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-10-2019, 07:52 AM
 
23,177 posts, read 12,205,977 times
Reputation: 29354
Quote:
Originally Posted by craigiri View Post
This type of a move is typical of our system. If Cologuard advertises that it is $500, will less people get tested for colon cancer? I think most of us would want our insurance to cover $500 for such a test.

But will the commercial say "Hey, for less than $20 you can have a great test?".....of course it will not.

There is no "point" here except our entire system needs reformed and direct-to-consumer drug advertising must go out the window. I am fine with the tests being available in the local pharm or on amazon, but spending billions for marketing on TV, etc is just crazy. We all pay.

Or maybe seeing commercials for colon tests will remind millions to get tested for colon cancer?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-10-2019, 08:58 AM
 
28,122 posts, read 12,581,566 times
Reputation: 15334
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scooby Snacks View Post
That's a great idea. Except for one huge problem. Trying to determine the cost of a drug for you personally is more complicated than calculus. I called my insurance company just yesterday to try to find out why my medicine was so expensive and how I could reduce the price. Note: I have worked in the medical field 15 years and am extremely familiar with how insurance works and even I was confused.

Me: Hi, I went to my pharmacy and I discovered my drug cost $470 this month, which I can't afford. How can I get it cheaper? Is there a way?

Aetna rep: This month you have a deductible of $X. You had no deductible last year. Pay the deductible and next month you will owe 29% of the drug cost because it is a Tier 5 drug for a total of $286.50 for 30 tablets. Once you hit the catastrophic coverage level, you will owe 25% of the cost of the drug so the price will go down to $X. However, you are using a preferred pharmacy, which is a good thing, because two months ago, you were using a nonpreferred pharmacy for your other drugs which made your cost much higher!

Me: Huh? Why was the other pharmacy nonpreferred? The service was so much better. What is your criteria for preferred vs nonpreferred? Never mind. Can I get the doctor to write an exception letter (which states the expensive drug is medically necessary and I can't use a generic) to reduce the Tier to 4 so the cost will be only $100?

Aetna rep: We don't do that anymore. You must pay the 29%. I can give you the number for financial assistance that may help you with the cost. And next year, maybe you can change to another one of our excellent Medicare plans we offer that will cover your drugs better. Etc, etc. . .

And that is the conversation for only one drug on one plan. Let's assume the cost is disclosed. What cost would it be? The retail price? The price with financial assistance? The price with Medicare? If so, which one of the Medicare plans? Or private insurance?
It will probably be retail price imo, theres no way they could list all the different prices for different ins carriers and other variables effecting cost.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-11-2019, 07:19 AM
 
21,915 posts, read 9,486,318 times
Reputation: 19448
Default Federal judge blocks Trump rule requiring drug prices in TV ads

Trump is the only one working to bring health costs down.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/healt...=.80c4aeb781e6



Federal judge blocks Trump rule requiring drug prices in TV ads

A federal judge Monday thwarted one of the Trump administration’s key efforts to address rising drug prices by blocking a rule that would have required drugmakers to include the list prices of their medicines in television ads.....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-11-2019, 07:21 AM
 
45,203 posts, read 26,421,987 times
Reputation: 24965
Good. The solution to high prices is less govt, not more.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-11-2019, 07:23 AM
 
4,481 posts, read 2,284,124 times
Reputation: 4092
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank DeForrest View Post
Good. The answer to lower prices is less govt, not more.
Specifically, how does less gov equate to lower prices? Show your work. Who did your vote for that is addressing it?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-11-2019, 07:26 AM
 
8,313 posts, read 3,923,570 times
Reputation: 10651
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grlzrl View Post
Trump is the only one working to bring health costs down.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/healt...=.80c4aeb781e6

Federal judge blocks Trump rule requiring drug prices in TV ads

A federal judge Monday thwarted one of the Trump administration’s key efforts to address rising drug prices by blocking a rule that would have required drugmakers to include the list prices of their medicines in television ads.....
Doesn't matter, because the real solution is to disallow the advertising of health care services or drugs. It is illegal in almost every other major Western democracy, so why is it allowed here?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top