You Wonder Why Drug Prices Are So High?

[Dawg]

So your problem is she can't tackle all the world ills in one fell swoop? Do you think that is realistic?

And its still more economical that having dead dopeheads.

Negative, it's just strange her first battle is for gays instead of Cancer patients and there's many more with Cancer than HIV/AIDs>> (they created their sickness)

WTH does the last sentence even mean? IMO, dead dope heads grows the economy!

 

[Dawg]

And then those greedy Big Pharma bastards spend money, not on R&D, but on pill-popping television commercials.

https://qz.com/1517909/big-pharma-spent-an-additional-9-8-billion-on-marketing-in-the-past-20-years-it-worked/

as politicians do for votes and Hillary spent over a $billion to Lose.

 

[ObamacareForever]

Negative, it's just strange her first battle is for gays instead of Cancer patients and there's many more with Cancer than HIV/AIDs>> (they created their sickness)

This isn't AOC's first battle.
So you think people with HIV should be subject to price-gouging because they aren't cancer patients?

WTH does the last sentence even mean? IMO, dead dope heads grows the economy!

It means its cheaper to dispense Narcan for free than to clean dead dope heads off the streets after the fact.

 

[Boca]

Can anyone get in on it? Or is it just subsidizing R&D for big pharma? How is this different from the R&D tax credits/deductions already in place?

1) It's not subsidizing. It's no different than if I have an idea for a widget I'll have to pay for somebody to develop it and somebody else to produce it. And I will own it.

2) I don't know about tax credits. You tell me how that works. But I'll assume the mechanism of the 7 year patent to recoup development substitutes for tax credits.

 

[Dawg]

This isn't AOC's first battle.
So you think people with HIV should be subject to price-gouging because they aren't cancer patients?

It means its cheaper to dispense Narcan for free than to clean dead dope heads off the streets after the fact.

As usual you're inserting shit that I never posted, must be how you think rather than me. I don't think anyone should be gouged even thought that's how they got HIV/AIDs. You work for Pharm yet here all day!

How can it be cheaper, dope heads got to be cleared from streets alive or dead and if alive taken to hospital. (you know who pays that Bill surely)

 

[ObamacareForever]

1) It's not subsidizing. It's no different than if I have an idea for a widget I'll have to pay for somebody to develop it and somebody else to produce it. And I will own it.

Who chooses what gets R&D? seems bound to end being politicized.
Why not just nationalize the patents on the drugs that pharma is price-gouging on?

 

[Drumcollie]

Did you take the time to read the lawsuit?
They have 500 pages of text messages and phone conversations of pharma executives conspiring to not compete with one another.
There is a lot of proof.
Why don't think you are qualified to judge the evidence for yourself?

I THINK YOU ARE RIGHT.

What Obanmacare does is deny coverage and force the majority of the bill on the patient. Trust me..I am on Obamacare and it wants to cover only 30 percent.

 

[Drumcollie]

The lawsuit itself is 510 pages long,

So you have not read it....

 

[ObamacareForever]

I don't think anyone should be gouged even thought that's how they got HIV/AIDs.

Then what's your problem with AOC sticking up fro victims of price-gouging?

How can it be cheaper, dope heads got to be cleared from streets alive or dead and if alive taken to hospital. (you know who pays that Bill surely)

A shot of narcan is like $150.
https://www.goodrx.com/narcan
a dead dope cost roughly $50,000.
https://www.governing.com/topics/finance/gov-opengov-opioid-overdose-deaths-cost-governments.html

 

[ObamacareForever]

I THINK YOU ARE RIGHT.

What Obanmacare does is deny coverage and force the majority of the bill on the patient. Trust me..I am on Obamacare and it wants to cover only 30 percent.

Tell me how you think health insurance works.

 

[Dawg]

Then what's your problem with AOC sticking up fro victims of price-gouging?


A shot of narcan is like $150.
https://www.goodrx.com/narcan
a dead dope cost roughly $50,000.
https://www.governing.com/topics/finance/gov-opengov-opioid-overdose-deaths-cost-governments.html

Only one's she's sticking up for are gays
cremate for $1600 and yes, government pays $600 for a hammer!

 

[ObamacareForever]

Only one's she's sticking up for are gays

You know that isn't true.

cremate for $1600 and yes, government pays $600 for a hammer!

So even by your math if 1 out of 10 shots of Narcan saves a life then its economical.

 

[OldTrapper]

You know that isn't true.

So even by your math if 1 out of 10 shots of Narcan saves a life then its economical.

Actually he probably doesn't especially if Trump said so. Same as with Drummerboy expecting one to have read a 500 page lawsuit rather then just read a summary.

 

[Dawg]

Actually he probably doesn't especially if Trump said so. Same as with Drummerboy expecting one to have read a 500 page lawsuit rather then just read a summary.

I've never heard Trump say anything of what thread is about.

 

[Boca]

Who chooses what gets R&D? seems bound to end being politicized.
Why not just nationalize the patents on the drugs that pharma is price-gouging on?

I know you like to argue but gimme a break. The topic is the high price of drugs and lawsuits against drug makers.

I proposed a simple way to rectify the problem. A proposal that would require new legislation to address taxing and dumbass indecipheral questions like who chooses what get gets R&D?

And if you were to think about it for 30 seconds, nationalizing means government owns it and runs it and they a hard time with a railroad and the Post Office.

Have a great weekend and chill.

 

[Deleted member 21794]

It is not because of Obama, or the ACA:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2019/05/13/teva-and-other-generic-drug-makers-accused-price-fixing/1190531001/

A coalition of attorneys general from 43 states and Puerto Rico claim in a federal lawsuit that generic drug manufacturers conspired to fix prices and markets of 114 drugs for both minor infections and chronic diseases such as arthritis, cancer, diabetes and HIV.

The sweeping 510-page lawsuit filed Friday at U.S. District Court in Connecticut alleges Teva, Pfizer, Mylan, and 17 other pharmaceutical companies worked in tandem to create a "fair share" of the generic drug market and avoid price-lowering competition.

The lawsuit also names 15 pharma executives in a price-fixing conspiracy that allegedly overcharged states and consumers billions of dollars.

Congress has sought to lower drug prices through policies that encourage robust competition among generic drug manufacturers.

But Connecticut Attorney General William Tong said investigators have obtained emails. text messages, phone record and accounts from former company insiders that show a years-long effort by generic drugmakers to "fix prices and divide market share."

Sounds like a good lawsuit. I hope justice prevails.

 

[ObamacareForever]

I know you like to argue but gimme a break. The topic is the high price of drugs and lawsuits against drug makers.

I proposed a simple way to rectify the problem. A proposal that would require new legislation to address taxing and dumbass indecipheral questions like who chooses what get gets R&D?

And if you were to think about it for 30 seconds, nationalizing means government owns it and runs it and they a hard time with a railroad and the Post Office.

Have a great weekend and chill.

I am not really arguing, just trying to flesh out the details of your proposal.
Can the private sector choose to develop molecules on their own? or is all R & D approved by the government?

 

[Boca]

I am not really arguing, just trying to flesh out the details of your proposal.
Can the private sector choose to develop molecules on their own? or is all R & D approved by the government?

If they choose to sure. But they shouldn't be allowed to gouge consumers to recoup their development costs with a 7 year exclusive patent. And why
would they want to anyway if the government is willing to pay them the costs plus a profit during the development?

That way, as soon as trials and FDA approval are obtained the government, owning the patent, could license production and sale worldwide.

That's just an overview of how it could work. Leave the details of making it work to the experts. Andthe it's no different than how aerospace and defense contractors advance technologies....starting with an idea.

 

[ObamacareForever]

If they choose to sure. But they shouldn't be allowed to gouge consumers to recoup their development costs with a 7 year exclusive patent. And why
would they want to anyway if the government is willing to pay them the costs plus a profit during the development?

That way, as soon as trials and FDA approval are obtained the government, owning the patent, could license production and sale worldwide.

That's just an overview of how it could work. Leave the details of making it work to the experts. Andthe it's no different than how aerospace and defense contractors advance technologies....starting with an idea.

-drug Patents are currently longer than 7 years.
-I agree the shouldn't they shouldn't be price-gouging, but Congress can just change enact tougher price-gouging laws.
-private companies would conduct their own r&d because there is no way the government would just give a blanket approval to all r&d spending. The approval process would become politicized.

 

[Boca]

-drug Patents are currently longer than 7 years.
-I agree the shouldn't they shouldn't be price-gouging, but Congress can just change enact tougher price-gouging laws.
-private companies would conduct their own r&d because there is no way the government would just give a blanket approval to all r&d spending. The approval process would become politicized.

Okay.....but I can tell you DOD didn't blanket approve our proposals because DOD isn't political, they have engineers and scientists with ideas as well, nor would the FDA in my opinion.

Approval wouldn't be up to politicians.