Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Trump Sends Pharma Stocks Down with New Tweet on Drug Prices

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 128 posts

Re: Trump Sends Pharma Stocks Down with New Tweet on Drug Prices

#41

Post by maxerickson »

StClaire wrote: post #7

It costs a quarter to manufacture each pill but the manufacturers charge several dollars for that pill. But they don't just price gouge. Drug companies need to file patents on their drug almost as soon as they sketch they come up with drug. From there they need at least 8 years to get through the FDAs approval process, so the manufacturers don't get nearly as much exclusive time with their IP as other industries. (Th…

Single doses of many cancer treatments cost $10,000 or more.

That's where the spending is concentrated, not in daily maintenance meds that cost a buck or two.

Re: Trump Sends Pharma Stocks Down with New Tweet on Drug Prices

#42

Post by mullen »

overcast wrote: post #2

Awesome. Have to give at least one thing to Trump. He's addressing exactly what he said in his campaign.

He has not done a single thing he said he would. He is all talk. This is just another issue that he will just talk and nothing will happen.

Re: Trump Sends Pharma Stocks Down with New Tweet on Drug Prices

#43

Post by maxerickson »

kar1181 wrote: post #12

Having lived in both the UK and US I find the cost of medicines very hard to understand here. For example in the UK I can buy a ventolin inhaler for £10 over the counter (if I went to the Doctor it would be free). But in the US, an inhaler costs me $60 (with insurance). Why is it that much more expensive here?

Corporatism.

Re: Trump Sends Pharma Stocks Down with New Tweet on Drug Prices

#44

Post by StClaire »

perseusprime11 wrote: post #34
StClaire wrote: post #7

It costs a quarter to manufacture each pill but the manufacturers charge several dollars for that pill. But they don't just price gouge. Drug companies need to file patents on their drug almost as soon as they sketch they come up with drug. From there they need at least 8 years to get through the FDAs approval process, so the manufacturers don't get nearly as much exclusive time with their IP as other industries. (Th…

Still does not address how generic drugs with the same chemicals cost a fraction of those from Big Pharma.

Generic manufacturers don't spend money on R&D

Re: Trump Sends Pharma Stocks Down with New Tweet on Drug Prices

#45

Post by maxerickson »

FireBeyond wrote: post #38
jostmey wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US pays an unfair burden to cover the cost of developing new drugs. That said, many drug companies seem more concerned with selling drugs that are barely better than a placebo and have cut back on research efforts.

Not really. The top two spending R&D pharma firms are the Swiss Novartis, and Hoffman-La Roche. J&J, despite having 40% higher revenues ($70B vs $50B) spent nearly $2B less ($8.2B versus $9.9B) on R&D.

They market drugs in the US though.

(I don't think the 'the US bears the burden' argument is especially compelling, I'm just saying that the country where a business is located doesn't reveal where it gets revenue)

Re: Trump Sends Pharma Stocks Down with New Tweet on Drug Prices

#46

Post by akiselev »

StClaire wrote: post #7

It costs a quarter to manufacture each pill but the manufacturers charge several dollars for that pill. But they don't just price gouge. Drug companies need to file patents on their drug almost as soon as they sketch they come up with drug. From there they need at least 8 years to get through the FDAs approval process, so the manufacturers don't get nearly as much exclusive time with their IP as other industries. (Th…

We already have a system for "research patents." It's called the Patent Term Restoration Program [1] and it allows the FDA to grant 5 year extensions for patents on approved drugs, up to 14 years of exclusivity from the date the marketing application is approved.

Giving pharmaceutical companies the full 20 years after approval, regardless of how long it took, would create a perverse incentive to patent early just to protect existing patent marketshare. It would also be extremely unfair to everyone else like the aviation/aerospace, semiconductor, and energy industries where it can easily take 5-10 years to get from patent to product and cost just as much. It's much better to subsidize research (which the public does on a massive scale already) and drive down the regulatory burden of approval, which we can do without decreasing safety by some targeted reforms of the FDA (mostly by giving it more power to organize clinical trial infrastructure and enforce transparency and trial integrity). Giving pharma more power is not the answer.

[1] https://www.fda.gov/Drugs/DevelopmentApprovalProcess/SmallBu...

Re: Trump Sends Pharma Stocks Down with New Tweet on Drug Prices

#47

Post by smokeyj »

dethswatch wrote: post #14
StClaire wrote: post #7

It costs a quarter to manufacture each pill but the manufacturers charge several dollars for that pill. But they don't just price gouge. Drug companies need to file patents on their drug almost as soon as they sketch they come up with drug. From there they need at least 8 years to get through the FDAs approval process, so the manufacturers don't get nearly as much exclusive time with their IP as other industries. (Th…

>It costs a quarter to manufacture each pill but the >manufacturers charge several dollars for that pill. What are the manufacturing costs for software?

Less for open source than proprietary. Draw whatever parallels you wish.

Re: Trump Sends Pharma Stocks Down with New Tweet on Drug Prices

#49

Post by mikeash »

microcolonel wrote: post #27
deepnotderp wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is great, we're trying everything except what the real problem is! Look at the Martin shkreli situation, there was another one like that before too. How did patents play a role there? High profit margins are not a bad thing, as long as people can still afford them. What we need is the proper type of regulations, I agree we need to streamline the fda process, but that alone is not going to solve things. There are…

I've not seen a case that what Shkreli did reduced the availability of his niche drug to patients.

Are you proposing that every single patient using Thiola or Daraprim was either able to afford the new price or get someone else to pay for it?

Re: Trump Sends Pharma Stocks Down with New Tweet on Drug Prices

#50

Post by not_that_noob »

coldcode wrote: post #29
curiousgal wrote: post #18

Step 1: Ask friend to short a bunch of stocks Step 2: Tweet up a storm Step 3: Profit

This is what scares me the most. Anyone of his family or friends could do the shorting. No one will ever catch them as the President will ensure the SEC is kept in the dark or suppressed. He might not even know they are doing it. Imagine knowing we are about to drop a nuke somewhere (like NK), you could make a fortune.

And even better, he's the damn president - he can pardon whoever he wants for whatever he wants.
Post reply on HN