Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

And the US consumer is screwed by pricing to make up for the countries that negotiate lower prices for their citizens....because hey...someone has got to make their profit margin.

Would you not see that as being the case?

 whembly wrote:

 TheMeanDM wrote:

so like I said the original OP posted increases of 1700% and this is not so, it may be the same drug but different delivery systems which can very greatly effect costs.

Do you always ignore that which you can't refute?

This shows which specific one is the 1700% increase sonce 2006:
Two vials of Hospira’s generic version, administered in hospitals, skyrocketed from $1.84 in 2006 to $31.66 by the end of 2014.

31.66÷1.84 = 17.20 = 1700% increase in 8 years

http://www.centralmaine.com/2016/05/25/our-opinion-price-hike-could-undercut-expanded-narcan-access/

*****

All that aside...I still posted documented increases of +600% over a very short timespan.

I work in this industry and I don't bat an eye to that... Drug prices actually does fluctuate so Narcan will probably drop in the short term.

Take a look at the actual procedure & administrative costs, which outpaces drug costs by a huge margin.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

Asterios wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
As an outsider, it seems weird to me that medicines are so expensive in the USA, and I sympathise with people who have to sacrifice so much to be able to pay for medicine.

Up here in Scotland, we get our medicine and perscription drugs for free when we need them. Ok, technically, it's not free, a small amount of my tax money pays for it, but nothing like the sums quoted in the article.

Articles like this remind me how fortunate I am at times.

Also I don't think Scotland has to contend with FDA approval either, noticed a lot of drugs are cheaper and available in other countries, while in the US to sell a drug it has to meet with FDA approval which can take years or even decades.

Good point. Obviously in Britain, we have regulations on drug safety as well, but we also have the advantage of economies of scale, as our nationalised health service buys everything in bulk.

You guys do have the equivalance of the FDA... the name escapes me at the moment.

Yes, the biggest reason why meds are cheaper there is that your government does most of the heavy lifting in price negotiations.

I think you're refering to NICE (National Institute Clinical Excellence)




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 TheMeanDM wrote:
And the US consumer is screwed by pricing to make up for the countries that negotiate lower prices for their citizens....because hey...someone has got to make their profit margin.

Would you not see that as being the case?

I have no link for it, but I remember reading an article a few years ago that said it was better to give British citizens cheap drugs to prevents heart problems, becuase if something went wrong with somebody who couldn't afford the drugs, then you'd end up paying more for a team of heart surgeons to fix the problem.

So, yes, there is an economic argument for giving people free drugs. It can save money.

People are like cars; preventative maintenance costs a lot less

Asterios wrote:
while in the US to sell a drug it has to meet with FDA approval which can take years or even decades.

This is true in every developed nation and they all broadly rely on the same criteria to determine drug safety.

 Silent Puffin? wrote:

Asterios wrote:
while in the US to sell a drug it has to meet with FDA approval which can take years or even decades.

This is true in every developed nation and they all broadly rely on the same criteria to determine drug safety.

but i've also noticed in other "Developed" countries they have certain drugs and procedures long before the US does.

Asterios wrote:

but i've also noticed in other "Developed" countries they have certain drugs and procedures long before the US does.

The inverse is also true. Drug safety is a very complex field.

 Silent Puffin? wrote:

Asterios wrote:

but i've also noticed in other "Developed" countries they have certain drugs and procedures long before the US does.

The inverse is also true. Drug safety is a very complex field.

Indeed http://www.newsmax.com/Health/Headline/drugs-medications-FDA-banned/2014/05/14/id/571315/

And the FDA is actually faster than Canada and the EMA http://www.forbes.com/sites/matthewherper/2012/06/19/more-proof-fda-is-faster-than-other-regulators/#582cb55f6629

I had forgotten about this...even though I wad personally affected by the inceease and exclusivity change.

I was having a severe gout attack and my doc prescribed colchicine for me....he had no clue it had changed....why would he?

The pharmacist was also shocked at the change in pricing and exclusivity.

Imagine *both* our surprise when my insurance denied coverage for it because of the change. Some loophole about drug classification or some such.

As I recall...it was going to be over $300

Now...we did take advantage of the pharma companies discount program. But I think it was actually $40....and my wife thinks that sounds right.

Before you think that the pharma company is doing that because they have a heart...

http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-mh-drug-discounts-20140714-column.html

(articles about colcrys and the change)

http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/medical_examiner/2011/03/a_giant_pain_in_the_wallet.html

http://www.jwatch.org/jw201006100000001/2010/06/10/spotlight-colchicine-colcrys-controversy

*shrug*

It's a direct result of capitalism. If we don't want this to happen then we should support regulations and restrictions on the economic system. A whole lot of people are opposed to such regulations and by extension are accepting this sort of thing as a downside. End of the day: the American people are OK with this.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
As an outsider, it seems weird to me that medicines are so expensive in the USA, and I sympathise with people who have to sacrifice so much to be able to pay for medicine.

Up here in Scotland, we get our medicine and perscription drugs for free when we need them. Ok, technically, it's not free, a small amount of my tax money pays for it, but nothing like the sums quoted in the article.

Articles like this remind me how fortunate I am at times.

The NHS has the same issue, it's just that as patients we're insulated from it more. Someone still has to buy the drugs in the first place.