3 ms·

edit: The post title changed, it used to reference drug value the value of a drug is the amount someone is willing to pay for it. different for everyone. whil

edit: The post title changed, it used to reference drug value the value of a drug is the amount someone is willing to pay for it. different for everyone. while im a big proponent of lower drug costs and agree drugs cost more than they should/could, drugs are typically very underpriced compared to their actual value. a drugs actual value to the a person can be tremendous. if we charged people the same amount as the value it brings them, they would not buy it! it would be a wash! since lots a people are buying lots of drugs, we know drugs are typically priced under their real value; that's a good thing!! in other words, talking about the value of a drug if you're arguing to lower their cost is the last thing you want to do!

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
dragonwriter 10y ago
> Drugs are typically underpriced compared to their value. For drugs under patent, which are monopolies, that's unlikely. For drugs for which there is relatively unrestrained competition in supply, that's expected, since competition drives prices down toward costs even if value is much higher.
- HarryHirsch 10y ago
  since competition drives prices down toward costs even if value is much higher Indeed. In fact, for many drugs volumes and prices are such that the market will support just one supplier in the market, and then funny things happen. There is exactly one supplier of benznidazole, which is one of the few things that actually work against T. cruzi. The other thing that works is nifurtimox, and that is in short supply as well.
iopuy 10y ago
And if they can't pay for it, let them suffer the consequences! Edit: Please stop editing your post as people reply to it. This was is before you changed it. > the value of a drug is the amount someone is willing to pay for it. different for everyone. >Drugs are typically very underpriced compared to their value. otherwise no one would buy them! > e.g talking about the value of a drug if you're arguing to lower their cost is the last thing you want to do!
- randyrand 10y ago
  sorry for the edits, just trying to make my post more clear/correct
maxxxxx 10y ago
"in other words, talking about the value of a drug if you're arguing to lower their cost is the last thing you want to do! " I have no idea what this means.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

dragonwriter 10y ago

> Drugs are typically underpriced compared to their value. For drugs under patent, which are monopolies, that's unlikely. For drugs for which there is relatively unrestrained competition in supply, that's expected, since competition drives prices down toward costs even if value is much higher.

HarryHirsch 10y ago
since competition drives prices down toward costs even if value is much higher Indeed. In fact, for many drugs volumes and prices are such that the market will support just one supplier in the market, and then funny things happen. There is exactly one supplier of benznidazole, which is one of the few things that actually work against T. cruzi. The other thing that works is nifurtimox, and that is in short supply as well.

iopuy 10y ago

And if they can't pay for it, let them suffer the consequences! Edit: Please stop editing your post as people reply to it. This was is before you changed it. > the value of a drug is the amount someone is willing to pay for it. different for everyone. >Drugs are typically very underpriced compared to their value. otherwise no one would buy them! > e.g talking about the value of a drug if you're arguing to lower their cost is the last thing you want to do!

randyrand 10y ago
sorry for the edits, just trying to make my post more clear/correct

maxxxxx 10y ago

"in other words, talking about the value of a drug if you're arguing to lower their cost is the last thing you want to do! " I have no idea what this means.