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

Biohackers take aim at big pharma’s stranglehold on insulin

freethink.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 392 posts

Re: Biohackers take aim at big pharma’s stranglehold on insulin

#221

Post by nom »

Thebroser wrote: post #205
nom wrote: post #173

Can someone explain in layman's terms why there is no competition on this market? As insulin is so cheap to produce, why can't I just get my own product approved and sell it?

There are crazy patents throughout the entirety of the insulin production pipeline. Some of these being extremely absurd such as patenting the pH of a buffer for specific protocols! I volunteer for the Open Insulin Foundation on/off when not too focused on my research project and it's basically how can we come up with a roadmap to making this decentralized insulin without violating any existing patents. An added laye…

Thank you, this is insightful and explains a lot.

For everyone interested, clickable link https://openinsulin.org/

Very noble cause, I appreciate it.

Re: Biohackers take aim at big pharma’s stranglehold on insulin

#222

Post by chiefalchemist »

skohan wrote: post #84
chiefalchemist wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The situation is that Type 2 Diabetes has raised the demand for insulin. More demand raises prices. The thing we can't talk about without risking cancellation is that nearly all Type 2 Diabetes is preventable. In other words, the choices of the many have a significant negative impact on those (i.e., Type 1'ers) who don't really have a choice.

Do you have a source on the scarcity claim? My understanding was that insulin is incredibly cheap to produce.

Never claimed scarcity. Only that as demand has increased - and it has significantly - so has price. It's basic economics. Unless there are additional economies of scale from that multiple then prices are going to increase. This isn't about insulin. It's simple economics.

Re: Biohackers take aim at big pharma’s stranglehold on insulin

#223

Post by foxyv »

sparrish wrote: post #178
foxyv wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The hard part is getting doctors to offer prescriptions for the cheaper brands as an alternative. A lot of doctors will prescribe the most expensive drug simply because they believe or know that it is better in some way without regard to it's cost. It's changed a lot recently as doctors have become more aware of the cost of these drugs. But you still have to self advocate for less expensive drugs. Less savvy people o…

But you don't need a prescription...

True! However doctors often don't know this or simply don't think to mention it. In addition, self medicating with OTC insulin can lead to poor outcomes. With proper training and care it can be a powerful tool for uninsured patients. However, insulin can be extremely dangerous leading to ER visits and insane hospital bills.

Every time I try to wrap my head around this stuff. How to fix the problems with our current system. I keep coming back to socialized or single payer health care.

Sure the current system works okayish for people like me. Insured and employed. But for my friends and the people I meet on the streets or the grocery store it's a nightmare. There is real suffering and death caused by no access to adequate health care. Even basic preventative stuff like diabetes care and checkups is missing.

https://khn.org/news/you-can-buy-insulin-without-a-prescript...

Re: Biohackers take aim at big pharma’s stranglehold on insulin

#224

Post by fencepost »

clarkrinker wrote: post #217
fencepost wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah, but are those assistance programs available to people on Medicare or Medicaid? I know a diabetic on Medicare so I've watched ads and lots of the ones that mention how little your copay can be seem to have a little note at the bottom of the screen "for patients on commercial insurance."

The Part D reforms from this year cap insulin costs at [1] $35 a month. You can setup your social security benefit to have it automatically deducted The premiums for part D in Washington State are about $40 a month [2] Most Medicaid recipients don't pay out of pocket for insulin. [1] https://www.medicare.gov/coverage/insulin [2] https://www.insurance.wa.gov/what-does-medicare-prescription... [3] https://www.commonwea…

Thanks, I'll pass that along to her. I think the insulin is a new thing this year, so it's possible she's not on a Part D plan in the "insulin savings model."

Re: Biohackers take aim at big pharma’s stranglehold on insulin

#225

Post by sithlord »

minitoar wrote: post #106
sithlord wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not likely, also lets not forget - as a Type 1 diabetic, you also take long acting insuling (unless you are on a pump). So, for example, a pump uses only fast acting insulin - and it gives a small amount (known as "basil") every 5 minutes (+/- depending on pump). Whereas, if you use pens (or from a vial) with direct injection, you also take a long acting insulin (levemir, Lantus, etc) once or twice a day (they are su…

I thought it was “basal”, not “basil”.

That's mobile autoformatting for ya, you are correct. I would correct, but edit limits...

Re: Biohackers take aim at big pharma’s stranglehold on insulin

#226

Post by chiefalchemist »

hourislate wrote: post #114
chiefalchemist wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The situation is that Type 2 Diabetes has raised the demand for insulin. More demand raises prices. The thing we can't talk about without risking cancellation is that nearly all Type 2 Diabetes is preventable. In other words, the choices of the many have a significant negative impact on those (i.e., Type 1'ers) who don't really have a choice.

I think we all understand that Type II is preventable but I don't think that's the main focus here. There are plenty of folks who have Type I that can't afford Insulin and have to ration it causing harm and additional costs in healthcare. It's slow mass murder for Type I diabetics who can't afford their medicine. If you believe that it is a supply and demand issue why does the same Insulin cost 80% less in a country…

> There are plenty of folks who have Type I that can't afford Insulin and have to ration it causing harm and additional costs in healthcare

Exactly. The preventable T2D is driving up demand (read: prices) for both T1D and T2D.

I don't know about Canada. I do know about supply and demand. We all do. In the context of healthcare it makes no sense that ppl abuse their health and then expect prices to fall.

Re: Biohackers take aim at big pharma’s stranglehold on insulin

#227

Post by anonbcpolitics »

Blahah wrote: post #4

Pretty cool, but it's a problem with the law and needs to be fixed in law.

Previous guy tried, but the new "Big guy" nixed the EO before it could go into effect.

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/12/23/2020-28...

Feel free to link any biased news article or Politifact telling me how it wouldn't have mattered or wasn't that effective. That's a lie, it capped the prices, but at least ask yourself if doing nothing is better, or worse, cancelling an action that did something. Then ask why they did it. Just like many other reversals it wasn't for you, it was for Pharma buddies. They say one thing and do another.

Re: Biohackers take aim at big pharma’s stranglehold on insulin

#228

Post by throwaway4china »

Blahah wrote: post #4

Pretty cool, but it's a problem with the law and needs to be fixed in law.

Previous guy tried, but the new "Big guy" nixed the EO before it could go into effect. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/12/23/2020-28...

Feel free to link any biased news article or Politifact telling me how it wouldn't have mattered or wasn't that effective. That's a lie, it capped the prices, but at least ask yourself if doing nothing is better, or worse, cancelling an action that did something. Then ask why they did it. Just like many other reversals it wasn't for you, it was for Pharma buddies. They say one thing and do another.

Re: Biohackers take aim at big pharma’s stranglehold on insulin

#229

Post by whereshunter »

Blahah wrote: post #4

Pretty cool, but it's a problem with the law and needs to be fixed in law.

Previous guy tried, but the new "Big guy" nixed the EO before it could go into effect. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/12/23/2020-28...

Feel free to link any biased news article or Politifact telling me how it wouldn't have mattered or wasn't that effective. That's a lie, it capped the prices, but at least ask yourself if doing nothing is better, or worse, cancelling an action that did something. Then ask why they did it. Just like many other reversals it wasn't for you, it was for Pharma buddies. They say one thing and do another.

Re: Biohackers take aim at big pharma’s stranglehold on insulin

#230

Post by f6v »

mkoubaa wrote: post #134
f6v wrote: post #17

As someone who had to create transgenic E.coli in a lab, I admire the effort. It’s hard to get it right, especially when trying to make bacteria produce stuff for you. However, it feels like a huge step backward. Imagine you couldn’t afford to buy a piece of bread. Instead, you need to grow your own grains and build a windmill first. Sounds ridiculous in 2021.

I agree with the sentiment but decentralizing and downscaling production is a win for resiliency. This is a good example but others include recycling and power generation have clearer benefits

Yes, but what about economies or scale? And the the production is already decentralized. I guess there’s more than one plant in the US.
Post reply on HN