3 ms·
> patients pay for most drugs out of pocket, and their generic prices are actually not much lower than they are in the US[0] But rayiner's entire point is abou
by jessriedel 10y ago
> patients pay for most drugs out of pocket, and their generic prices are actually not much lower than they are in the US[0]
But rayiner's entire point is about incentivizing R&D by allowing the collection of monopoly rents on patented drugs; he's not talking about generics. How the market for generics is structure has essentially no impact on R&D. And as you say, since Canada's generics are nearly as expensive as in the US, or are more expensive (see below), re-importing generics does not usefully push down prices.
http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/this-is-why-canada-has-the-second-highest-medication-costs-in-the-world http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/this-is-why-canada-...
- chimeracoder 10y ago> But rayiner's entire point is about incentivizing R&D by allowing the collection of monopoly rents on patented drugs. I'm pointing to the generics as an illustration of Canada's pharmaceutical prices not being as controlled as people often think. (In fact, in Canada they're not controlled directly at all - they're simply pegged by law to other countries which set their own prices). I actually agree with rayiner's point about incentivizing R&D by allowing (temporary) collection of monopoly rents on patented drugs. I'm just saying that they should be collecting those monopoly rents from all countries that consume the drugs. Right now, they basically collect them only in the US, and allowing reimporting from other countries which respect US patent laws would ensure that all countries are contributing towards that in proportion to the amount that they actually consume the results of the R&D.
- jessriedel 10y agoAhh, I see. Thank you for clarifying.