3 ms·
From what I understand he only raised prices that insurance companies would pay. He offered the drug for free to anyone without insurance who couldn't afford it
by Kaveren 8y ago
From what I understand he only raised prices that insurance companies would pay. He offered the drug for free to anyone without insurance who couldn't afford it. So, not exactly.
- magnamerc 8y agoAlso, that money from insurance companies would go to the development of better and safer drugs. People just tend to skim the surface of a news story and form their opinions based on public consensus, which is that Shkreli is an evil person. Of course in reality, he's a distraction.
- jfk13 8y agoAnd if someone (unnecessarily, I presume - I doubt the drug had been a loss-maker while it was selling at a lower price) dramatically raises the price of a drug to insurance companies, where do you suppose the insurance companies will look to find the extra money?
- Kaveren 8y agoIn the case of Daraprim? Nowhere. It's not a drug many people need. Shrkreli himself has talked about this. It simply wouldn't be able to make a dent because of this, and it didn't. If I'm recalling correctly, and I might not be, Shkreli is agnostic about the larger policy issue at hand, he simply made a choice for his own business that had little to no negative real impact.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]