The US spends more on healthcare for no gain says new report from Johns Hopkins
1–10 of 537 posts
Re: The US spends more on healthcare for no gain says new report from Johns Hopkins
#2It's worth noting that the U.S. market does pay for the lion's share of patented drugs, effectively funding a significant portion of R&D that benefits the whole world years later when generics come into market (at least for those drugs which are not costly to manufacture, which happen to be the majority).
I'm not saying this model is right. I'm just saying that doing away with it will have fundamental consequences to healthcare R&D
EDIT: To be clear, a minority of drugs are either very hard to manufacture (It's been a while for me so I don't recall their exact name, but I think they may be called "biosynthetics" – please correct me if I'm wrong) or researched for a very small number of patients (so-called "orphan drugs"), which confers them additional protection from generics and competitors. These generally have much higher prices than the "standard" drug.
Re: The US spends more on healthcare for no gain says new report from Johns Hopkins
#3It's worth noting that the U.S. market does pay for the lion's share of patented drugs, effectively funding a significant portion of R&D that benefits the whole world years later when generics come into market (at least for those drugs which are not costly to manufacture, which happen to be the majority). I'm not saying this model is right. I'm just saying that doing away with it will have fundamental consequences to…
If this is in fact true it means the rest of the world is freeloading off the US system.
Not saying I'm convinced it is true. I'd like to see a deeper unbiased analysis.
Re: The US spends more on healthcare for no gain says new report from Johns Hopkins
#4It's worth noting that the U.S. market does pay for the lion's share of patented drugs, effectively funding a significant portion of R&D that benefits the whole world years later when generics come into market (at least for those drugs which are not costly to manufacture, which happen to be the majority). I'm not saying this model is right. I'm just saying that doing away with it will have fundamental consequences to…
Meh -- If this is the case, it would be far better to explicitly fund research and development in a separate appropriation rather than just mindlessly subsidizing all prescription meds. Calamities like the Valeant fraud would be much less common without the US dramatically overpaying for drugs.
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/04/04/inside-the-val...
Re: The US spends more on healthcare for no gain says new report from Johns Hopkins
#5It's worth noting that the U.S. market does pay for the lion's share of patented drugs, effectively funding a significant portion of R&D that benefits the whole world years later when generics come into market (at least for those drugs which are not costly to manufacture, which happen to be the majority). I'm not saying this model is right. I'm just saying that doing away with it will have fundamental consequences to…
I've heard this argument a lot, even by diehard conservatives. The amazing thing about it coming from these diehard conservatives (I'm not saying you're one of them, your comment just reminded me of it) is they're basically saying it's OK for the USA to help the rest of the world socialize their drug costs but it's not OK for the USA to help socialize drug costs for their own citizens.
Re: The US spends more on healthcare for no gain says new report from Johns Hopkins
#6It's worth noting that the U.S. market does pay for the lion's share of patented drugs, effectively funding a significant portion of R&D that benefits the whole world years later when generics come into market (at least for those drugs which are not costly to manufacture, which happen to be the majority). I'm not saying this model is right. I'm just saying that doing away with it will have fundamental consequences to…
If this is in fact true it means the rest of the world is freeloading off the US system. Not saying I'm convinced it is true. I'd like to see a deeper unbiased analysis.
> If this is in fact true it means the rest of the world is freeloading off the US system.
Sort of. We also export our definitions of diseases, and since the market for new diseases is a lemon market it makes sense that other countries should pay less for the treatments. E.g. if people in other countries can't really be sure whether or not hysteria is really a real disease that affects women, it makes sense that they would be less willing to pay the full price for cure. It's just like how consumers in the U.S. probably wouldn't pay full price for a pill to prevent fan death. Overall though the U.S. probably comes out ahead by exporting its medical model.
Re: The US spends more on healthcare for no gain says new report from Johns Hopkins
#7[deleted]
Re: The US spends more on healthcare for no gain says new report from Johns Hopkins
#8It's worth noting that the U.S. market does pay for the lion's share of patented drugs, effectively funding a significant portion of R&D that benefits the whole world years later when generics come into market (at least for those drugs which are not costly to manufacture, which happen to be the majority). I'm not saying this model is right. I'm just saying that doing away with it will have fundamental consequences to…
I’m not sure what kind of R&D the $800 or whatever it costs now Epipen is paying for. R&D for lobbyists?
Or profits because the company gamed the market.
Re: The US spends more on healthcare for no gain says new report from Johns Hopkins
#9It's worth noting that the U.S. market does pay for the lion's share of patented drugs, effectively funding a significant portion of R&D that benefits the whole world years later when generics come into market (at least for those drugs which are not costly to manufacture, which happen to be the majority). I'm not saying this model is right. I'm just saying that doing away with it will have fundamental consequences to…
That would explain why we pay more for drugs, but as the article notes higher drug prices is just one thing we pay more for:
> The researchers determined that the higher overall health care spending in the U.S. was due mainly to higher prices—including higher drug prices, higher salaries for doctors and nurses, higher hospital administration costs and higher prices for many medical services.
Re: The US spends more on healthcare for no gain says new report from Johns Hopkins
#10It's worth noting that the U.S. market does pay for the lion's share of patented drugs, effectively funding a significant portion of R&D that benefits the whole world years later when generics come into market (at least for those drugs which are not costly to manufacture, which happen to be the majority). I'm not saying this model is right. I'm just saying that doing away with it will have fundamental consequences to…
I've heard this argument a lot, even by diehard conservatives. The amazing thing about it coming from these diehard conservatives (I'm not saying you're one of them, your comment just reminded me of it) is they're basically saying it's OK for the USA to help the rest of the world socialize their drug costs but it's not OK for the USA to help socialize drug costs for their own citizens.
It’s a talking point. Compact. Powerful. No grounding in reality.
My dad is a conservative and his talking point about the house member who called trump a motherfucker shouldn’t have said that because she’s a woman. It’s ok that Trump swears but my dad was literally screaming about this representatives language.