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

Insulin is way too expensive. California has a solution: Make its own

vox.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 273 posts

Re: Insulin is way too expensive. California has a solution: Make its own

#131

Post by ceejayoz »

Kon-Peki wrote: post #117
ceejayoz wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There is a Senate Parliamentarian who makes calls on interpretations Sorta. They can be fired at will ( https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/2001/05/08/k... ) and they're making advisories , which the Senate can just... overrule.

If the parliamentarian is "overruled" for political reasons, the likely outcome is that the Senate grinds to a halt, not that the majority party gets to pass desired legislation that otherwise wouldn't pass. The job of the parliamentarian is to interpret the rules and give advice about what is allowed and what is not. Sure, they can be wrong. But if you don't like the rules, change them. Because any self-governing bo…

> But if you don't like the rules, change them.

That's what the vote to overrule the parlimentarian essentially does, for that one vote. Both parties have done so for judicial confirmations.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_option; "a parliamentary procedure that allows the Senate to override a standing rule by a simple majority"

> Any legislation the Senate "passes" in violation of its own rules doesn't actually exist.

A court is not likely to agree with that.

Re: Insulin is way too expensive. California has a solution: Make its own

#132

Post by giraffe_lady »

WalterBright wrote: post #114
genderwhy wrote: post #60

This is great news. Honestly, I hope to see more nationalization of widely used services (or whatever the equivalent word for nationalization is at state or municipal levels.) Municipal broadband, power, roads, schools, post, housing, and healthcare? It's long overdue, and with an appropriate amount of funding has been shown to be effective at controlling costs and delivering moderately good quality in most cases. A…

> has been shown to be effective at controlling costs That has never happened. What does happen is the cost is borne by the taxpayer rather than the user of the service. The "warping" of the profit motive in the insulin case is entirely caused by government interference and regulation (by making it nearly impossible for competitors to spin up and make insulin).

> the cost is borne by the taxpayer rather than the user of the service

If the service is "not dying preventably" that's fine.

Re: Insulin is way too expensive. California has a solution: Make its own

#133

Post by RcouF1uZ4gsC »

projektfu wrote: post #96
r3trohack3r wrote: post #69

> Though insulin generally costs less than $10 per dose to produce, some versions of the drug have a list price above $200. This is in part because, in the US, a warped market has allowed three companies to dominate the insulin business. > With California leading the way, a handful of states are considering trying to disrupt the market for essential medications, starting with insulin. The plan would be to manufacture…

A lot of formerly protected insulins, e.g. insulin glargine, are off patent now. The remaining moat for generics consists of FDA approval, delivery system patents, and manufacturing process patents/trade secrets. For a generic insulin to get FDA approval it needs bioequivalence which is a lot like running the original safety and effect studies over again, while dealing with spurious injunctions and the like from the…

>. For a generic insulin to get FDA approval it needs bioequivalence which is a lot like running the original safety and effect studies over again

That is incorrect. A bioequivalence study is much simpler and cheaper than the original safety and efficacy studies.

You do not need to prove that safety and efficacy of the drug, only that you are delivering the equivalent of the originally studied drug at the same doses.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bioequivalence

Re: Insulin is way too expensive. California has a solution: Make its own

#134

Post by mhb »

bhawks wrote: post #110
favaq wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's not pretend almost all diabetics didn't get in that situation themselves.

1.4 million people in the us alone would disagree with you. Type 1 diabetes has nothing to do with diet it is an autoimmune disease with genetic and possible environmental antecedents. If you're interested in learning more about type 1 diabetes please check out: https://www.jdrf.org/t1d-resources/about/facts

"More than 37 million Americans have diabetes (about 1 in 10), and approximately 90-95% of them have type 2 diabetes."

https://www.cdc.gov/diabetes/basics/type2.html

Re: Insulin is way too expensive. California has a solution: Make its own

#136

Post by fallingfrog »

r3trohack3r wrote: post #69

> Though insulin generally costs less than $10 per dose to produce, some versions of the drug have a list price above $200. This is in part because, in the US, a warped market has allowed three companies to dominate the insulin business. > With California leading the way, a handful of states are considering trying to disrupt the market for essential medications, starting with insulin. The plan would be to manufacture…

The inventor of insulin sold the patent in 1923 to the University of Toronto for one dollar so that nobody could take advantage of people in the way that's currently being done.

This is 100 year old technology. It has nothing to do with development cost.

https://www.vox.com/2019/4/3/18293950/why-is-insulin-so-expe...

Re: Insulin is way too expensive. California has a solution: Make its own

#137

Post by fallingfrog »

For context: the patent on insulin was sold in 1923 to the university of Toronto for one dollar because the inventor felt it was unethical to use this invention to make egregious profits off people who had no alternative. This is 100 year old technology. It's not a manufacturing, regulatory, or technological issue. It's just monopoly pricing and greed.

Re: Insulin is way too expensive. California has a solution: Make its own

#138

Post by lotsofpulp »

standardUser wrote: post #105
r3trohack3r wrote: post #69

> Though insulin generally costs less than $10 per dose to produce, some versions of the drug have a list price above $200. This is in part because, in the US, a warped market has allowed three companies to dominate the insulin business. > With California leading the way, a handful of states are considering trying to disrupt the market for essential medications, starting with insulin. The plan would be to manufacture…

>> Is California just going to ignore these intellectual property laws? Like they ignored asinine federal drugs laws? I hope so!

California is not ignoring federal drug laws. California has no mandate to enforce federal drug laws.

Rather, the executive branch of the federal government is choosing to not enforce federal drug laws (in some situations, for some drugs).

Federal agents can walk in and charge everyone in a cannabis store anytime they want, as I understand it.

Re: Insulin is way too expensive. California has a solution: Make its own

#139

Post by kybernetyk »

genderwhy wrote: post #60

This is great news. Honestly, I hope to see more nationalization of widely used services (or whatever the equivalent word for nationalization is at state or municipal levels.) Municipal broadband, power, roads, schools, post, housing, and healthcare? It's long overdue, and with an appropriate amount of funding has been shown to be effective at controlling costs and delivering moderately good quality in most cases. A…

>Municipal broadband, power, roads, schools, post, housing, and healthcare? It's long overdue,

Yeah, everything was great under the state owned telco monopolies. Let's get back to that!

Post reply on HN