5 ms·

That does seem like a public health concern. Normally you'd recover damages from a class action lawsuit or similar, but it sounds like it was common practice at

That does seem like a public health concern. Normally you'd recover damages from a class action lawsuit or similar, but it sounds like it was common practice at the time so nobody was acting negligent. That's just a sad state of affairs. Gilead - or maybe even Congress/local states in cooperation with Gilead - could get a lot of goodwill by offering the cure for free in a one-time deal to people who: * Developed Hepatitis C before 1992. * Had a blood transfusion that likely contributed to the illness * Can't afford to pay for the cure otherwise. To start with, let's say that you make less than $60k/year to qualify. * Don't have insurance that would cover it It seems about as justifiable as when the government steps in to help after a natural disaster.

refurb 10y ago
Don't have insurance that would cover it Gilead was doing that.[1] Hell, most drug companies give free drug for patients who are either uninsured or under-insured (their insurer won't pay for it). [1]http://www.gilead.com/responsibility/us-patient-access http://www.gilead.com/responsibility/us-patient-access
- MichaelBurge 10y ago
  That raises two questions: * The article is about someone underinsured who went to India. Why couldn't he get free drugs from Gilead instead of needing to jump through some hoops in India? * Wouldn't insurance companies just decline to pay for every expensive treatment? Probably customers won't want to go through prolonged legal battles fighting them for $84000 if they can get the treatment for free. Then again, $1.3 billion in a quarter is only something like 15,500 full-price treatments. The CDC site[1] says there are 3.5 million sufferers. Maybe they expect most people not to pay, so millionaires and some insured will pay. [1] http://www.cdc.gov/hepatitis/hcv/cfaq.htm#cFAQ21 http://www.cdc.gov/hepatitis/hcv/cfaq.htm#cFAQ21

refurb 10y ago

Don't have insurance that would cover it Gilead was doing that.[1] Hell, most drug companies give free drug for patients who are either uninsured or under-insured (their insurer won't pay for it). [1]http://www.gilead.com/responsibility/us-patient-access http://www.gilead.com/responsibility/us-patient-access

MichaelBurge 10y ago
That raises two questions: * The article is about someone underinsured who went to India. Why couldn't he get free drugs from Gilead instead of needing to jump through some hoops in India? * Wouldn't insurance companies just decline to pay for every expensive treatment? Probably customers won't want to go through prolonged legal battles fighting them for $84000 if they can get the treatment for free. Then again, $1.3 billion in a quarter is only something like 15,500 full-price treatments. The CDC site[1] says there are 3.5 million sufferers. Maybe they expect most people not to pay, so millionaires and some insured will pay. [1] http://www.cdc.gov/hepatitis/hcv/cfaq.htm#cFAQ21 http://www.cdc.gov/hepatitis/hcv/cfaq.htm#cFAQ21