A Huge Overnight Increase in a Drug’s Price Raises Protests

  • Thread starter Thread starter EmperorNapoleon
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
E

EmperorNapoleon

Guest
Specialists in infectious disease are protesting a gigantic overnight increase in the price of a 62-year-old drug that is the standard of care for treating a life-threatening parasitic infection.
Click to expand...
The drug, called Daraprim, was acquired in August by Turing Pharmaceuticals, a start-up run by a former hedge fund manager. Turing immediately raised the price to $750 a tablet from $13.50, bringing the annual cost of treatment for some patients to hundreds of thousands of dollars.
Click to expand...
“What is it that they are doing differently that has led to this dramatic increase?” said Dr. Judith Aberg, the chief of the division of infectious diseases at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai. She said the price increase could force hospitals to use “alternative therapies that may not have the same efficacy.”
Click to expand...
Turing’s price increase is not an isolated example. While most of the attention on pharmaceutical prices has been on new drugs for diseases like cancer, hepatitis C and high cholesterol, there is also growing concern about huge price increases on older drugs, some of them generic, that have long been mainstays of treatment.
Click to expand...
While some price increases have been caused by shortages, others have resulted from a business strategy of buying old neglected drugs and turning them into high-priced “specialty drugs.”
Click to expand...
Cycloserine, a drug used to treat dangerous multidrug-resistant tuberculosis, was just increased in price to $10,800 for 30 pills from $500 after its acquisition by Rodelis Therapeutics. Scott Spencer, general manager of Rodelis, said the company needed to invest to make sure the supply of the drug remained reliable. He said the company provided the drug free to certain needy patients.
Click to expand...
Capitalism at work, folks.
 
EmperorNapoleon said:
Capitalism at work, folks.
Click to expand...
Under socialism, these kinds of drugs never exist in the first place. That said, without knowing all the details, I am more suspicious of corporatism going on, not capitalism.
Capitalism includes competition. Government confiscation of health care choice and liberty, beginning with ACA, always excludes competition, and leads to cronyism.

Jon
 
JonNC said:
Under socialism, these kinds of drugs never exist in the first place. That said, without knowing all the details, I am more suspicious of corporatism going on, not capitalism.
Capitalism includes competition. Government confiscation of health care choice and liberty, beginning with ACA, always excludes competition, and leads to cronyism.

Jon
Click to expand...
What liberty? This is business as usual for the pharmaceutical industry, which holds lives at ransom. Government intervention is necessary. And yes, there is an element of corporatism since only Walgreens is allowed to dispense it to patients now.
 
sallybutler said:
The price probably has not gone up everywhere. Only in those countries that don’t regulate drug prices.

BTW, why is it okay to regulate drugs, but not prices?
Click to expand...
Good question. I am all in favor of regulating drug prices. Unfortunately the pharmaceutical industry has powerful lobbyists in Washington.
 
EmperorNapoleon said:
What liberty? This is business as usual for the pharmaceutical industry, which holds lives at ransom. Government intervention is necessary. And yes, there is an element of corporatism since only Walgreens is allowed to dispense it to patients now.
Click to expand...
Government intervention is what causes the problems. Government sets itself up as regulator of an industry such as health care. It sets the regulations,m and limits choices. A good example is the limiting of choices in insurance - across state lines, and setting requirement as to what a policy must offer, even if it violates the religious rights of individuals and churches.
People complain about fascism, but ACA is exactly what fascism is: government allows private businesses to survive, as long as they are subservient to government tyranny.
There is also an element of greed here, to be sure, but within businesses and, of course, within government bureaucracies.

Jon
 
JonNC said:
Government intervention is what causes the problems. Government sets itself up as regulator of an industry such as health care. It sets the regulations,m and limits choices. A good example is the limiting of choices in insurance - across state lines, and setting requirement as to what a policy must offer, even if it violates the religious rights of individuals and churches.
People complain about fascism, but ACA is exactly what fascism is: government allows private businesses to survive, as long as they are subservient to government tyranny.
There is also an element of greed here, to be sure, but within businesses and, of course, within government bureaucracies.

Jon
Click to expand...
Government intervention keeps the private sector in check. The ACA has nothing to do with this. It certainly did not cause a hedge fund manager to buy the patent for a previously affordable, common, and critical drug and render it completely un-affordable with limited access. He should be behind bars.
 
JonNC said:
Government intervention is what causes the problems. Government sets itself up as regulator of an industry such as health care. It sets the regulations,m and limits choices. A good example is the limiting of choices in insurance - across state lines, and setting requirement as to what a policy must offer, even if it violates the religious rights of individuals and churches.
People complain about fascism, but ACA is exactly what fascism is: government allows private businesses to survive, as long as they are subservient to government tyranny.
There is also an element of greed here, to be sure, but within businesses and, of course, within government bureaucracies.

Jon
Click to expand...
You are aware that each state controls who sells insurance in their state , aren’t you? Are you suggesting that the states should be forced to let out of state businesses sell products they don’t want in their state?
 
EmperorNapoleon said:
Capitalism at work, folks.
Click to expand...
LOL, this is an example of bad Govt regulations at work. In a more capitalist system, the FDA would have approved a generic version and you could buy it for a fraction.

This is 100% a failure in regulation, by ensuring a monopoly.

Capitalism is the antithesis of monopolies via regulation
 
Theo520 said:
LOL, this is an example of bad Govt regulations at work. In a more capitalist system, the FDA would have approved a generic version and you could buy it for a fraction.

This is 100% a failure in regulation, by ensuring a monopoly.

Capitalism is the antithesis of monopolies via regulation
Click to expand...
You’re describing Socialism, not Capitalism.
 
EmperorNapoleon said:
Government intervention keeps the private sector in check. The ACA has nothing to do with this. It certainly did not cause a hedge fund manager to buy the patent for a previously affordable, common, and critical drug and render it completely un-affordable with limited access. He should be behind bars.
Click to expand...
Its his product!! He bought it. He can shut it down if he chooses. Then ones who should be behind bars are the ones who limit competition, by limiting the number of insurance companies and policies available.
The business is there. Make an offer. Get some rich Hollywood type to buy it and give the drug away. Get the insurance companies to pressure the guy to lower his prices to a market level. I don’t know how old the product is, but simply getting a generic version out will lower the price.

But the climate for this kind of stuff is created by government - always.

Jon
 
JonNC said:
Its his product!! He bought it. He can shut it down if he chooses. Then ones who should be behind bars are the ones who limit competition, by limiting the number of insurance companies and policies available.
The business is there. Make an offer. Get some rich Hollywood type to buy it and give the drug away. Get the insurance companies to pressure the guy to lower his prices to a market level. I don’t know how old the product is, but simply getting a generic version out will lower the price.

But the climate for this kind of stuff is created by government - always.

Jon
Click to expand...
It is a product on which human lives depend. The government should seize the patent and make it available to any company that wishes to produce it. The hedgefund manager should be jailed for extortion and murder if someone dies because of his greed.
 
I ve just looked it up here. We have it by Glaxosmithekline laboratory for $ 52 ( pesos) 25 mg x 20 . The price is orientative. That would be say 5 dollars?
The drug is pyrimethamine.and it comes out as Daraprim.
Is it that one that will get to hundreds ?
 
graciew said:
I ve just looked it up here. We have it by Glaxosmithekline laboratory for $ 52 ( pesos) 25 mg x 20 . The price is orientative. That would be say 5 dollars?
The drug is pyrimethamine.and it comes out as Daraprim.
Is it that one that will get to hundreds ?
Click to expand...
Thats the one.
 
EmperorNapoleon said:
It is a product on which human lives depend. The government should seize the patent and make it available to any company that wishes to produce it. The hedgefund manager should be jailed for extortion and murder if someone dies because of his greed.
Click to expand...
Seize it? On what constitutional grounds. What power does the constitution provide under the enumerated powers to seize personal property? What you are suggesting is fascist tyranny. Even in eminent domain cases, market value is paid when real property is taken.

Jon
 
JonNC said:
Seize it? On what constitutional grounds. What power does the constitution provide under the enumerated powers to seize personal property? What you are suggesting is fascist tyranny. Even in eminent domain cases, market value is paid when real property is taken.

Jon
Click to expand...
You speak as though making live-saving medicines available to all is a bad thing, but your “fascist” boogeyman doesn’t scare me. I’m more concerned about corporate greed costing lives than the seizure of a piece of paper.
 
Theo520 said:
Nope, appropriate regulation is an essential part of capitalism. Face it, the Govt through regulation has created a monopoly for this drug, though generics are available.
Click to expand...
No, Capitalism advocates an environment in which corporations regulate themselves free of government intervention. The problem is the lack of regulation in this case and that can be remedied through Socialism.
 
For the past several months I have been taking the diabetes drug Tradjenta. It has worked well. Now starting in 1/16 my Rx company will only pay for this drug on an exception basis, if I can get approved, and it goes from Tier 3 to 4 and I have to pay 40%, which is about $160 a month. All the Rx companies I have checked so far does not cover this drug. The doctor my have to put me on another drug for another condition which would bring my out of monthly total to over $200.00. I am retired on a fixed income and live a simple lifestyle. This is going to be quite a hardship, if I can do it at all. Tradjenta retails for $400.00 for a 30 day supply. This is the best drug because I have kidney disease and Tradjenta does not affect the kidneys.

Yes, there needs to be some kind of control over the prices of drugs, otherwise a lot of people are going to die because they cannot afford the drugs that could help them or keep them alive.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top