4 ms·
Look how Novartis and other drug companies are pricing their cancer drugs: https://www.change.org/p/secretary-of-health-and-human-services-protest-high-cancer-
by creamyhorror 11y ago
Look how Novartis and other drug companies are pricing their cancer drugs:
https://www.change.org/p/secretary-of-health-and-human-services-protest-high-cancer-drug-prices-so-all-patients-with-cancer-have-access-to-affordable-drugs-to-save-their-lives https://www.change.org/p/secretary-of-health-and-human-servi...
Prices have increased more than tenfold between 2000 (average price $5,000-$10,000 per year) and today (average price of new cancer drugs exceeds $120,000 per year).
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/15/opinion/why-drugs-cost-so-much.html?_r=0 http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/15/opinion/why-drugs-cost-so-...
Novartis, the company that makes the leukemia drug Gleevec, keeps raising the drug’s price, even though the drug has already delivered billions in profit to the company. In 2001 Novartis charged $4,540, in 2014 dollars, for a month of treatment; now it charges $8,488. In its pricing, Novartis is just keeping up with other companies as they charge more and more for their drugs. They know we can’t say no.
http://www.nbcnews.com/health/cancer/utterly-broken-drug-market-high-cost-surviving-cancer-n369261 http://www.nbcnews.com/health/cancer/utterly-broken-drug-mar...
Lauren Baumann is one of the lucky ones. Though she has cancer, chronic myeloid leukemia, it is manageable, as long as she takes a daily pill called Gleevec. Gleevec is considered a wonder drug, turning Lauren's leukemia from a death sentence to a disease she and thousands of others can live with. The problem is, even with health insurance and a full-time job, Lauren can't afford the monthly co-pay for Gleevec. It can be as high as $2,000 a month — twice the average mortgage payment in the U.S.
"I feel like you get punished," says Baumann. "I didn't ask to get cancer; I didn't ask to get sick. I was 26 and I was perfectly healthy."
This is essentially extortion due to price inelasticity of demand. $9,000-$12,500/month to survive, for the rest of your natural life! Patients+insurers have to pay whatever price the companies ask. For something as crucial as a life-saving drug, maybe the prices shouldn't be set only by market forces? Maybe generics should be allowed for import after patents expire the first time around?
(There are analyses of drug discovery costs around, and even after all those costs and reliance on basic research funded by taxpayer money, pharma companies make a very healthy profit. Much of the money goes into marketing, which we wouldn't need so much of in a system similar to the NHS which approves drugs for dispensing countrywide.)
Please sign the above Change.org petition (first link) and spread it! I normally don't make appeals, but this is one truly egregious case of unethical profiting.
An international panel of 115 doctors co-authored a paper decrying these ridiculous prices and offering 7 solutions, including allowing Medicare to negotiate drug prices once again (which they now aren't allowed to!):
http://www.forbes.com/sites/matthewherper/2015/07/23/155-angry-doctors-propose-7-solutions-for-terrifying-cancer-drug-prices/ http://www.forbes.com/sites/matthewherper/2015/07/23/155-ang...
- ultramancool 11y ago> maybe the prices shouldn't be set only by market forces?? It's (arguably) not the market here that's the problem, but the patent. The patent means that generic manufacturers can't get in on the market and create a commodity out of it with a race to the bottom on price. The problem isn't the market, but the absolute lack of a market created by the exclusivity of a patent. We need to find a way as a society that these companies can profit off the research and development of these drugs while still allowing generic manufacturers to do what they do best: create a real, competitive market to produce the drug in bulk. Unfortunately I don't think there's any clear answers here.
- brianwawok 11y agoGovernment funding the research + selling the drugs at cost would benefit mankind overall... but then politicians would decide how many $ to spend researching which drug per year, which has it's own downsides..
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- ekianjo 11y ago> Government funding the research + selling the drugs at cost would benefit mankind overall... Wasnt that how NASA was supposed to work ? Oh wait, we know how it went...
- RodericDay 11y agoWe went to the moon?
- ekianjo 11y agoI'm talking about what happened to NASA after that. Obviously look at the ridiculous budgets they have now.
- 11y ago