OMG - pharma companies are unregulated on their drug costs in the US???

[borked]

Watching a programme investigating drug companies and just heard that the US is the only country that doesn't regulate what drug companies can charge for their drugs....

life saving pills that cost 10-20x more in the US than in Europe, and people having to come to Europe for treatment to cut costs, some even having their travel paid for buy the HMO (edit - HMO is that the acronym??)....

Of course, Obama said he's gonna tackle this.

But wow - I didn't know that

[mozadek]

Only socialist liberals want more regulation, let the free market set the price. Worked well for Enron & Bear Stearns.

[Sly]

This just made me curious about something... if American companies create most of the drugs, and every other country in the world has regulations on what the drugs can sell for... what that really means is, the Americans are paying the high price of research and development while the rest of the world gets cheap drugs based on the import policies of their countries. Hmm...

[borked]

Originally Posted by Sly

This just made me curious about something... if American companies create most of the drugs, and every other country in the world has regulations on what the drugs can sell for... what that really means is, the Americans are paying the high price of research and development while the rest of the world gets cheap drugs based on the import policies of their countries. Hmm...

fair point, with one major flaw ....R&D is costly, but it's pharma companies that use that to justify their costs of their pills. A couple of tens of millions of US$ to get a drug to the counter - a drop in the ocean compared to what they make selling and licensing it.

What they fail to disclose (in such statements) is about 15-20% of R&D is done in govt-funded laboratories (around the world, not jsut US), and what do those non-profit labs get in return for the hard research? about 100k/year during the length of the contract. Of that, I'm 100% sure.

[pocketkangaroo]

Big Pharma owns your politician. That's why they can do whatever they want. Not only are they unregulated, they helped push laws that made it illegal for you to buy drugs on the free market overseas.

[mynameisjim]

Originally Posted by Sly

This just made me curious about something... if American companies create most of the drugs, and every other country in the world has regulations on what the drugs can sell for... what that really means is, the Americans are paying the high price of research and development while the rest of the world gets cheap drugs based on the import policies of their countries. Hmm...

Good point. But the really sad thing is that Americans are really just just subsidizing advertising. Pharma companies spend much more on advertising and promotion then they do on R&D.

[Sly]

Originally Posted by mynameisjim

Good point. But the really sad thing is that Americans are really just just subsidizing advertising. Pharma companies spend much more on advertising and promotion then they do on R&D.

I think it's most likely a combination of research and development, marketing, and lobbyists (political and medical.)

I definitely think we are getting screwed and something needs to be done... but I also think that my original statement brings a fair point and something to keep in mind. If Europeans only allow one dollar per pill, for example, those American companies are going to make the other night dollars per pill somewhere... and that's with us, because we can kind of afford it and we created it.

[CarlosTheGaucho]

Whenever I travel to the States I buy me all kinds of regular drugs, just in case, as it costs here next to nothing.

Fucking a citizen over something he needs to keep himself healthy is not a good business in my book.

[chupachups]

It´s funny how you all miss the running point here. In 90% of the cases the prices arent cut because the governments put a cap on the PRICE, but they put a cap on how much the consumer can spend and then carry whatever costs above that level. Viagra, HIV meds or whatever doesnt cost any less here.

[Sly]

Originally Posted by chupachups

It´s funny how you all miss the running point here. In 90% of the cases the prices arent cut because the governments put a cap on the PRICE, but they put a cap on how much the consumer can spend and then carry whatever costs above that level. Viagra, HIV meds or whatever doesnt cost any less here.

So you are saying that if a particular pill costs $10 in the United States, it still costs $10 in let's say Germany even if the consumer buys it for one dollar... the German government just pays for the other 9 dollars?

[chupachups]

Originally Posted by Sly

So you are saying that if a particular pill costs $10 in the United States, it still costs $1 in let's say Germany even if the consumer buys it for one dollar... the German government just pays for the other 9 dollars?

Yes I believe that would be the case most of the times. I would pay the regular price, whatever price f.ex Merck has set on my medicine in this local market, up to a government specified level, and then my spendings would be subsidized.

[pornguy]

Originally Posted by borked

fair point, with one major flaw ....R&D is costly, but it's pharma companies that use that to justify their costs of their pills. A couple of tens of millions of US$ to get a drug to the counter - a drop in the ocean compared to what they make selling and licensing it.

What they fail to disclose (in such statements) is about 15-20% of R&D is done in govt-funded laboratories (around the world, not jsut US), and what do those non-profit labs get in return for the hard research? about 100k/year during the length of the contract. Of that, I'm 100% sure.

The Pharma companies ONLY send the things to test in that facilities if they want to start with world wide sales. At least thast the way it was when I worked for a pahrma company.

Originally Posted by mynameisjim

Good point. But the really sad thing is that Americans are really just just subsidizing advertising. Pharma companies spend much more on advertising and promotion then they do on R&D.

Not exactly true.. The company I was working for, spent 17.4 million in R&d for its first drug. Spent 8.9 million on advertising 1.1 million on I believe they called it Drug seminars. ( thats where they treat a bunch of doctors to a weekend away ) and made 98million in the first 2 years.

Last I heard, those companies were in business to make a profit. So...

[pigman]

Its is not a free market when you have a patent!

[dav3]

That's pretty messed up. Leave to greedy politicians to allow drug companies to sell out their own people.

[sperbonzo]

You guys are also failing to take into account the fact that there are many drugs that have millions spent on them that do not get through stage II or stage III testing.... that money is just gone. Also, the COMPLETELY out of control litigation of greedy lawyers with no compunctions or morals cost the drug industry MASSIVE amounts of money.


We can go ahead and cap those prices, and then the companies will stop with the R&D. Look what happened when the government started to regulate the price of flu vaccines in the mid 90s, 10 years later we have vaccine shortages because US companies no longer make them here.


Things are always more complicated then you think at first look....


.
.

[borked]

Originally Posted by chupachups

Yes I believe that would be the case most of the times. I would pay the regular price, whatever price f.ex Merck has set on my medicine in this local market, up to a government specified level, and then my spendings would be subsidized.

well, the programme I saw interviewed some trailor park person who had a treatable cancer, but couldn't afford the $75 per pill to treat it. So she said "God will decide". That same pill would cost her GBP1.50 if she went to the UK for treatment. Not GBP1.50 and the govt foot the rest, because that is only available to UK citizens.

Then the report went onto others that do actually fly to the UK, France, Germany for treatment as it's less costly. These govts will not foot the bill for outsiders, so therefore, it must physically cost less. Which was the point of the programme...

[borked]

Originally Posted by pornguy

The Pharma companies ONLY send the things to test in that facilities if they want to start with world wide sales. At least thast the way it was when I worked for a pahrma company.

Not true - the public labs are fronting a helluva lot of basic research paid for by the pharmas... the "expensive stuff" (which it is), not just the trials.

[GetSCORECash]

Originally Posted by Sly

So you are saying that if a particular pill costs $10 in the United States, it still costs $10 in let's say Germany even if the consumer buys it for one dollar... the German government just pays for the other 9 dollars?

In Cuba, that is the case. That is the government buys the drug for some market price and then sells it to it's citizens for pennies.

Originally Posted by chupachups

Yes I believe that would be the case most of the times. I would pay the regular price, whatever price f.ex Merck has set on my medicine in this local market, up to a government specified level, and then my spendings would be subsidized.

No exactly, Brazil in particular has threaten to make it's own HIV drugs, and does so under special patents from the drug companies.

The WTO's 146 member countries reached an agreement back in August of 2003, allowing impoverished nations to bypass big pharmaceutical companies and import copied patented medicines to fight killer diseases.

The agreement opened a huge potential new market by allowing generic drug makers to export drugs still under patent protection to treat diseases such as AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria when needy countries declare they can't afford prices charged by multinational pharmaceutical corporations.

Read more about it here: http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/a...articleid=1338

This is one of the reasons, why the whole debate occured several years back, as to Canadian Drugs being cheaper, and that they weren't as potent as the american counter part.

[Sausage]

Originally Posted by mozadek

Only socialist liberals want more regulation, let the free market set the price. Worked well for Enron & Bear Stearns.

You are kidding right ?

In a system where those with money can lobby those in power so that they can make even more money .... and you want to leave that unregulated?!

You have to be barking mad!

[After Shock Media]

Aside from R&D, anyone know how liable drug companies are in other countries? I know in general less people/companies can or get sued in many countries. Hell many people laugh at are excessive warning labels already.

[Libertine]

Originally Posted by Sausage

You are kidding right ?

In a system where those with money can lobby those in power so that they can make even more money .... and you want to leave that unregulated?!

You have to be barking mad!

I take it you do not know what happened with Enron and Bear Stearns?

Originally Posted by borked

Not true - the public labs are fronting a helluva lot of basic research paid for by the pharmas... the "expensive stuff" (which it is), not just the trials.

I can't believe that if you watch a tv program that you actually believe everything that it says. If it is on tv than it must be true.

[borked]

Originally Posted by JaneB

I can't believe that if you watch a tv program that you actually believe everything that it says. If it is on tv than it must be true.

No, I know that from personal experience, no tv

Originally Posted by borked

well, the programme I saw interviewed some trailor park person who had a treatable cancer, but couldn't afford the $75 per pill to treat it. So she said "God will decide". That same pill would cost her GBP1.50 if she went to the UK for treatment. Not GBP1.50 and the govt foot the rest, because that is only available to UK citizens.

Then the report went onto others that do actually fly to the UK, France, Germany for treatment as it's less costly. These govts will not foot the bill for outsiders, so therefore, it must physically cost less. Which was the point of the programme...

A lot of the drug companies do offer reduced and free medication to people who have financial issues. Also there are certain clinics and hospitals in the US that are free, even for cancer treatments.

[borked]

Originally Posted by After Shock Media

Aside from R&D, anyone know how liable drug companies are in other countries? I know in general less people/companies can or get sued in many countries. Hell many people laugh at are excessive warning labels already.

A damn good point - no I don't know at all, but in Europe pharma advertising (like in the US) is not allowed. Neither is going to the Doc and saying "I've got this this and this, prescribe me this"

If the Doc prescribes you a generic, you take the generic.
If he'she prescribes you a brand and it goes titsup, the Doc is liable (who no doubt will sue the pharma via his union).

At least, that's how I see it here....

Originally Posted by borked

No, I know that from personal experience, no tv

Well then why do you keep referring to this tv program then and not your own personal experience? I am sure many people on here have taken many medications that were expensive. I know I have.

[tony286]

Originally Posted by sperbonzo

You guys are also failing to take into account the fact that there are many drugs that have millions spent on them that do not get through stage II or stage III testing.... that money is just gone. Also, the COMPLETELY out of control litigation of greedy lawyers with no compunctions or morals cost the drug industry MASSIVE amounts of money.


We can go ahead and cap those prices, and then the companies will stop with the R&D. Look what happened when the government started to regulate the price of flu vaccines in the mid 90s, 10 years later we have vaccine shortages because US companies no longer make them here.


Things are always more complicated then you think at first look....


.
.

they wont stop r&d that's how they make the products to make their billions.

[sperbonzo]

Originally Posted by sperbonzo

You guys are also failing to take into account the fact that there are many drugs that have millions spent on them that do not get through stage II or stage III testing.... that money is just gone. Also, the COMPLETELY out of control litigation of greedy lawyers with no compunctions or morals cost the drug industry MASSIVE amounts of money.


We can go ahead and cap those prices, and then the companies will stop with the R&D. Look what happened when the government started to regulate the price of flu vaccines in the mid 90s, 10 years later we have vaccine shortages because US companies no longer make them here.


Things are always more complicated then you think at first look....


.
.

[borked]

And very often, if the Doc prescribes a brand, the pharmacist will suggest:

"This will cost you 15 euro with your health plan. This generic is the same active ingredient and is covered 100% by your plan. Do you want the generic?"

[Libertine]

Big Pharma says hi, and thanks you for the profits.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ical_companies

Edit: click the individual companies to see more recent profits.

[borked]

Originally Posted by JaneB

Well then why do you keep referring to this tv program then and not your own personal experience? I am sure many people on here have taken many medications that were expensive. I know I have.

I'm referring to the tv prog cos I didn't know the prices were unregulated by the US govt. Nothing more...

[Sausage]

Originally Posted by Libertine

I take it you do not know what happened with Enron and Bear Stearns?

Again lack of damned regulation. Our banks here are in great shape when compared to banks over there and sure as hell are regulated a shit ton more. Half the problem was that your banks were so fucking power drunk and able to do what the hell they wanted the whole system was bound to fail!

An unregulated free market when you are talking in terms of food, shelter and medicine only works for those who can afford to eat, sleep under a roof, and keep themselves alive. Those who cant for whatever reason are thrown to the wolves in not so good times, and thats not a society I would want to live in.

Originally Posted by tony404

they wont stop r&d that's how they make the products to make their billions.

They also couldn't stop r&d even if they want to. The FDA requirements for a drug is very strict. They usually have r&d for years before they even try to get it approved for human trials.

[borked]

Originally Posted by tony404

they wont stop r&d that's how they make the products to make their billions.

[borked]

Originally Posted by JaneB

They also couldn't stop r&d even if they want to. The FDA requirements for a drug is very strict. They usually have r&d for years before they even try to get it approved for human trials.

And there are many many drugs FDA approved that are illegal in Europe

[tony286]

only 4 of the top 10 drug companies are from the us.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pharmaceutical_company

[D-man]

Originally Posted by JaneB

I can't believe that if you watch a tv program that you actually believe everything that it says. If it is on tv than it must be true.

No idea about this show but you have to live in a hole not to know the US drug prices are off the hook! But yeah Viagra has a NASCAR team and spammers to pay for! But im sure that means it's cheaper drugs in the US! and btw - it's not just drug companies making money of the US drug market - It's Doctors, Insurance compainies and magazine ad's, TV ad's and more!

Oh and lets not forget about the lawyers that sue every drug company for every single drug they produce.

[Libertine]

Originally Posted by Sausage

Again lack of damned regulation. Our banks here are in great shape when compared to banks over there and sure as hell are regulated a shit ton more. Half the problem was that your banks were so fucking power drunk and able to do what the hell they wanted the whole system was bound to fail!

An unregulated free market when you are talking in terms of food, shelter and medicine only works for those who can afford to eat, sleep under a roof, and keep themselves alive. Those who cant for whatever reason are thrown to the wolves in not so good times, and thats not a society I would want to live in.

If you know that, then how exactly did you not realize that he was being sarcastic?

[Sausage]

Originally Posted by Libertine

If you know that, then how exactly did you not realize that he was being sarcastic?

Oh yes .. hook line and sinker lol !

Originally Posted by tony404

only 4 of the top 10 drug companies are from the us.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pharmaceutical_company

That doesn't really matter on here. As usual it will turn into a US bashing thread. That is why trying to have a rational conversation is almost impossible on here.

[DWB]

There is a med I get in the USA for $85 USD. In Thailand I get the SAME med, NOT generic, same brand for.... $2 USD.

[pocketkangaroo]

Originally Posted by JaneB

That doesn't really matter on here. As usual it will turn into a US bashing thread. That is why trying to have a rational conversation is almost impossible on here.

It's because the U.S. policy on drugs is retarded.

[Helix]

Originally Posted by pocketkangaroo

It's because the U.S. policy on drugs is retarded.

So bitching about it on here is going to make a change? I think not.

[pocketkangaroo]

Originally Posted by JaneB

So bitching about it on here is going to make a change? I think not.

We don't have the money to compete financially with Big Pharma in buying up politicians.

[woj]

Originally Posted by Libertine

Big Pharma says hi, and thanks you for the profits.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ical_companies

Edit: click the individual companies to see more recent profits.

The numbers may seem huge, but if you look at their financials more closely, you will see that their sales, revenues, margins, etc are similar to other companies of the same size...

[mynameisjim]

Originally Posted by pornguy

Not exactly true.. The company I was working for, spent 17.4 million in R&d for its first drug. Spent 8.9 million on advertising 1.1 million on I believe they called it Drug seminars. ( thats where they treat a bunch of doctors to a weekend away ) and made 98million in the first 2 years.

Last I heard, those companies were in business to make a profit. So...

That sounds like a very small company (by pharma standards) and I'm sure some companies don't follow the mold. If you look at the public records of the big pharma companies in the U.S. it's very common to spend more on marketing than R&D. What I'm about to say may be wrong, but I remember a number I saw in an article that says the amount they spend on promos to the medical community comes out to $30K per doctor. That doesn't even include marketing to consumers. Don't forget, you can't watch a TV show without seeing 2 or 3 drug commercials and that's happening on every channel every day, every hour.

I'm not saying it's wrong necessarily as they have to make money, but it is what it is.

[DaddyHalbucks]

Free enterprise is not a bad thing, it's a good thing. Competition will drive down prices better than government commands.

[Azoy?]

Originally Posted by borked

Watching a programme investigating drug companies and just heard that the US is the only country that doesn't regulate what drug companies can charge for their drugs....

life saving pills that cost 10-20x more in the US than in Europe, and people having to come to Europe for treatment to cut costs, some even having their travel paid for buy the HMO (edit - HMO is that the acronym??)....

Of course, Obama said he's gonna tackle this.

But wow - I didn't know that

Yah. Many Americans take buses to Canada to get drugs up in Canada or order via mail since drug prices are lower in Canada since the profits are regulated.
I mean lets all make money but there are limits and it ain't right to take advantage of people who need the drugs.