U.S. Consumers Foot the Bill for Cheap Drugs in Europe and Canada
1–10 of 22 posts
Re: U.S. Consumers Foot the Bill for Cheap Drugs in Europe and Canada
#2That's one of the things that sucks about IP law. It'll never be standardized internationally so those places where it's strict, prices are high. In nations where it's looser, prices are low. We pay the government to enforce laws that keep our prices up. It's kind of a bummer.
Re: U.S. Consumers Foot the Bill for Cheap Drugs in Europe and Canada
#3That's one of the things that sucks about IP law. It'll never be standardized internationally so those places where it's strict, prices are high. In nations where it's looser, prices are low. We pay the government to enforce laws that keep our prices up. It's kind of a bummer.
There's an argument to be made that there will be more innovation and creation of these drugs if there are fortunes to be made.
Re: U.S. Consumers Foot the Bill for Cheap Drugs in Europe and Canada
#4"Abroad, where the “negotiation” consists of governments telling you what they are willing to pay, even as you know that they can always change the law to shorten your patent term so that other countries can manufacture your product, using your research for free."
The author doesn't mention any examples of this actually happening, which makes me wonder if it's just theoretical. Does it happen?
Also, how much of big pharma's costs goes to marketing? They don't have consumer marketing expenses outside the USA.
Re: U.S. Consumers Foot the Bill for Cheap Drugs in Europe and Canada
#5That's one of the things that sucks about IP law. It'll never be standardized internationally so those places where it's strict, prices are high. In nations where it's looser, prices are low. We pay the government to enforce laws that keep our prices up. It's kind of a bummer.
It's nothing to do with IP; Simply what the market is willing to pay. We're not buying knockoffs, or violating anyone's IP (I'm european). In fact, the article claims the US buys more generics than we do.
We just have a completely different market, and the prices reflect that. With state-sponsored healthcare, you have one buyer who represents a vast proportion of a nation's market. The economics become reaching most the market on a narrow margin, vs reaching a tiny market on a more favourable margin.
Apparently the narrow margin scales to beat the private margin, based on those sales being made.
Re: U.S. Consumers Foot the Bill for Cheap Drugs in Europe and Canada
#6Wait a second.
There are two strange assumptions in this article. One that paying more for something makes it better. And secondly profits gained are always reinvested in research and development.
Paying more for something does not make it better especially in the realm of healthcare. There are lots of reports and studies that show that American spending on healthcare is one of the highest in the world and among comparable nations it's health outcomes are the lowest (basically american consumers are getting fleeced). Here is an article from our friends at Fox News http://www.foxnews.com/health/2013/07/10/united-states-healt...
So paying more for healthcare does not mean better outcomes.
To bring it back to the drugs debate, perhaps it is the American consumers that are getting ripped off and paying higher amounts for drugs doesn't result in better drugs being developed but instead just results in higher profits for drug companies.
Drug companies are private enterprises. They don't exist for the public good, but they exist to make money. So higher profits WILL result in more money being removed and not invested in R&D. If the companies weren't doing this they wouldn't be living up to their responsibilities as corporations.
Re: U.S. Consumers Foot the Bill for Cheap Drugs in Europe and Canada
#7"Abroad, where the “negotiation” consists of governments telling you what they are willing to pay, even as you know that they can always change the law to shorten your patent term so that other countries can manufacture your product, using your research for free." The author doesn't mention any examples of this actually happening, which makes me wonder if it's just theoretical. Does it happen? Also, how much of big p…
As of 2008, somewhere near $58 billion/year.
"From this new estimate, it appears that pharmaceutical companies spend almost twice as much on promotion as they do on R&D."
[1] http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal...
Re: U.S. Consumers Foot the Bill for Cheap Drugs in Europe and Canada
#8"The most hopeful thing I can say, in fact, is that we may naturally be running out of feasible drug candidates, so maybe it doesn’t matter much."
I'd hate to have the mental-state that regarded such a situation as 'the most hopeful thing I can say'. Is almost as though the author has been briefed that higher prices are the aim here.
Also, if you look at research money on the diseases that affect the most people, it is mostly not coming from big-pharma anyway, but rather from state backed research, much of it from the countries that the author reckons are raising US drug prices. Personally, I suspect that the main reason for high drug prices in the US is actually having such a massive army of middlemen who do not have interests aligned with the patient, but that is only a guess.
Re: U.S. Consumers Foot the Bill for Cheap Drugs in Europe and Canada
#9That's one of the things that sucks about IP law. It'll never be standardized internationally so those places where it's strict, prices are high. In nations where it's looser, prices are low. We pay the government to enforce laws that keep our prices up. It's kind of a bummer.
Cheap everything, including drugs, is the value that free markets are supposed to create, to lead to the cheapest - and patents aren't supportive of this. Regarding people who say this research and discoveries wouldn't have happened without ability to patent - there are plenty of researchers, many, if not the majority, who do their work because they want to help people and the field interests them - so if they have their living costs taken care of, and access to the tools they need, they'll be happy and the research would be discovered. The U.S. pushed on the capitalist system to the extremes, and it leads to the acceleration of innovation - though we have enough basic science and technology figured out now, where we should be focusing on taking care of people properly, which we're currently doing a poor job of - doing a good job is where free market value is supposed to lead. Free market capitalism, without protectionism (no longer free market - a popular term hijacked by those in control), leads to the cost of production getting as close to the next unit of production being $0. If something is $0 then everyone can benefit from it. This is why the internet is so valuable, invaluable, and hugely important in the world's progression. If you have an internet connection, then the cost of acquiring the benefit from software created or receiving information is basically $0. Right now though the positive benefits of unchecked capitalism don't outweigh the negative effects that it also generates, fosters. Without patents and the such then the world would benefit in the same way - everyone can very cheaply benefit from software. The problem is many countries have aligned themselves with being in a controlling state, to use leverage for short-term gain - though it is only temporary, and only lasts so long as you maintain control - and control is costly. If the whole world was fitting the bill for new research, the cost to each of us would be practically $0; I won't go deep into the idea that money isn't real either, and that if we were all in service to everyone else, then everyone would be very well taken care of - we're not born into this construct so it's very hard for most people to visualize this experience of living this way, or to feel safe and secure.
Re: U.S. Consumers Foot the Bill for Cheap Drugs in Europe and Canada
#10"The most hopeful thing I can say, in fact, is that we may naturally be running out of feasible drug candidates, so maybe it doesn’t matter much." I'd hate to have the mental-state that regarded such a situation as 'the most hopeful thing I can say'. Is almost as though the author has been briefed that higher prices are the aim here. Also, if you look at research money on the diseases that affect the most people, it…
I promise you the level of state-backed research for pharmaceuticals is much higher in the US than it is from "the countries that the author reckons are raising US drug prices." I would, however, be the first to tell you that throwing money at drug development is not a solution to good drug development, and may be counterproductive beyond a certain point.