For Patients in USA - Drug Prices Are Outrageous, but There Is a Way to Reduce Them - from MedPage Today

[cujoe]

A very thoughtful article that explains the regulatory mechanisms and marketing gimmicks that lead to the high drug prices in the US. As with most posts at MedPage Today, take time to read the comments sections. We should all rue the day that drug companies were allowed to do direct-to-customer advertising in the US, as many now spend more money on that than they do on R&D. The question that should be asked is: "Are high drug prices paying for R&D or for the non-stop advertising on every conceivable form of print and electronic media? Be Well - cujoe

medpagetoday.com/blogs/popl...

[Cllcanada Top Poster CURE Hero]

It was interesting... view here

Testimonies can be downloaded in .PDF format

finance.senate.gov/hearings...

[cujoe in reply to Cllcanada]

While not related to CLL, here is a classic example showing how honorable drug companies are when profits are concerned:

Lucentis Vs. Avastin: A Macular Degeneration Treatment Controversy

allaboutvision.com/conditio...

Free market capitalism, mon oeuil!

Be Well - cujoe

Edited to fix link

[Jonquiljo]

It requires a politician or group of politicians with guts enough to fight these companies and intermediaries and enact laws that will control their charges. We don't see a lot of that.

Instead we see massive programs to socialize all or parts of medicine that will bankrupt this country (yes, we are far too broke to fix our system totally now). So, we get very little "incremental change".

[TimHB in reply to Jonquiljo]

As long as our politicians are essentially on the payroll of the drug companies, nothing will ever change. It all begins with campaign finance reform. And switching to a single-payer system, or "Medicare for all" - like the rest of the world has - would save us about $2 trillion over the next 10 years compared to what we spend on health care today. And it would eliminate all the layers we currently have which suck up money and add no value to the system - like insurance companies and PBMs.

[UK-Sparky]

Thanks for posting Cujoe. This shows the dark side of a pure profit ethic. I am sure there will one day be a balance between research cost recovery and a reasonable profit V what patients and National health Services can afford to save lives. In my mind a measure of how humanity has progressed as a race.

UK Sparky

[Big_Dee]

Hello cujoe

I have been amazed at the amount of direct-to-customer advertising in last few years. I have no idea what many of the advertised drugs actually treat. General they just use a cryptic series of letters to represent whatever. I guess if you have that illness, you know what it is for and school your doctor. Ha Ha

[TimHB in reply to Big_Dee]

And the fact that pharma companies spend more on direct-to-consumer advertising than they do on R & D negates their claim they need high prices to fund R & D. We need to eliminate consumer advertising - and you'll never hear that in the media as all the networks depend on that income.

[cujoe in reply to TimHB]

Tim, Several years back (2015), the AMA came out against D-T-C advertising. My questions is, where were they back in 1997 when the FDA relaxed their regs to allow the indiscriminate use of them we see now? (Thanks, Bill Clinton!)

AMA calls for ban on DTC ads of prescription drugs and medical devices

ama-assn.org/press-center/p...

And from a USNews article about a year later:

It's important to note that newer drugs, like those recently released to cure hepatitis C, can cost upwards of $80,000 dollars for a 12-week course, making these drugs out of the reach of many average patients. Ironically, these are currently some of the most highly advertised drugs on television. Pharma, of course, argues these ads are essential to prompt patients to "initiate a conversation" with their doctors. However, in reality, these ads serve one purpose: to increase sales and profits for drug companies.

(emphasis added.)

health.usnews.com/health-ne...

As always seems to be the case, "Follow The Money".

Be Well - cujoe

[AussieNeil Administrator in reply to cujoe]

The USA and New Zealand are the only countries in the world that permit direct to consumer prescription drug advertising. Doctors understandably don't want it because the indirect marketing just results in their patients putting pressure on them to explain why an advertised drug is (generally) not appropriate for them.

You have to wonder how many advertisements are paid for and viewed for each additional resulting prescription. I'd think the hit rate must be similar to what's achieved with email spam, but unfortunately with a much, much higher cost that has to be paid for out of the sales income. For society's benefit, there's no doubt that that money would be better directed towards R&D than marketing!

[Cllcanada Top Poster CURE Hero in reply to AussieNeil]

I love those drug ads....the announcer is extolling the benefit of a drug, while healthy people dance through a field of wildflowers...

What I pay attention to, is the 118 side effects that crawls across the bottom of the screen in 12 point text... 🔍🔍🔍

'Ask our doctor if Xanadudarall is right for you... no demand it!'

We insist, and we are Big Pharma... 🤑

~chris 🇨🇦

[AussieNeil Administrator]

Pharmaceutical companies blame the 'List Price', which I gather only the uninsured pay:

mdedge.com/hematology-oncol...

It's also why I am unlikely to ever visit the USA again, as much as I'd like to. I can't get travel insurance because of how CLL has increased my risk of needing medical treatment - treatment which would quickly bankrupt me at the gambit list prices I'd be charged.

[cujoe in reply to AussieNeil]

New World Order = 3 individuals in USA have more net worth than bottom 160 million.

If "things" ever change, it would be a real honor to have you visit here.

In the meantime, Be Well - cujoe