5 ms·

Another reading is, "The US drug market subsidizes the R&D for the entire rest of the world." One possible alternative to selling new, novel drugs for market p

Another reading is, "The US drug market subsidizes the R&D for the entire rest of the world." One possible alternative to selling new, novel drugs for market prices is not having those drugs at all. We really ought to be thankful that some entities are willing to bear the billion-dollar cost of developing a new drug. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_drug_development https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_drug_development

CuriouslyC 6y ago
You come off like a shill. The majority of new drug development is the result of publicly funded research. Drug companies mine that research, and in many cases their main contribution is ramming the drug through the FDA approval pipeline. The university will also take a big cut, even though they were given (mostly public) grants to do the research. Drug development is probably one of the best targets for socialization. That would reduce the number of stupid, pointless drugs that get developed. How many billions have been wasted to produce ~20 different anti-depressants, none of which does more than slightly outperform placebo?
- sdinsn 6y ago
  > The majority of new drug development is the result of publicly funded research. Drug companies mine that research Isn't the entire point of publicly funded research to spur scientific and economic development? Are you proposing that public research should be hidden away so that private companies don't do anything useful with it?
  - licebmi__at__ 6y ago
    No, but it's to take in account where the high price (in certain poorly regulated geographies) is justified by the cost of research.
Redoubts 6y ago
That sounds like a worst-possible world, and something we really shouldn't be tolerating.
username90 6y ago
The profits from selling drugs in EU is more than enough for the cost of research. The US market prices are higher since the US market has higher sales costs (need to spend more ads and marketing dollars, and need to negotiate with all the insurers etc). Banning prescribed medicine ads and fixing the overly complicated healthcare system would help a lot keeping costs down and it wouldn't affect how much there is left over for research at all. https://truecostofhealthcare.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/PharmBG2018.png https://truecostofhealthcare.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/... https://truecostofhealthcare.org/the_pharmaceutical_industry/ https://truecostofhealthcare.org/the_pharmaceutical_industry...
JimTheMan 6y ago
Yes, because all of Europe isn't doing any research on drugs... And Japan and the UK and China and so on... That's an extremely US centric view. The market in the US is inelastic and inefficient. There's a reason why the prices are so high relative to care provided in other western countries.
Nursie 6y ago
> Another reading is, "The US drug market subsidizes the R&D for the entire rest of the world." There's no way that a decades-old, cheap to produce tropical ointment falls under that category. If you feel that a massively high price on generics is some sort of worthwhile cross-subsidy to other things... I'm not sure I agree.
Nursie 6y ago
In the case of aciclovir, which I was talking about there, it's of UK origin.

CuriouslyC 6y ago

You come off like a shill. The majority of new drug development is the result of publicly funded research. Drug companies mine that research, and in many cases their main contribution is ramming the drug through the FDA approval pipeline. The university will also take a big cut, even though they were given (mostly public) grants to do the research. Drug development is probably one of the best targets for socialization. That would reduce the number of stupid, pointless drugs that get developed. How many billions have been wasted to produce ~20 different anti-depressants, none of which does more than slightly outperform placebo?

sdinsn 6y ago
> The majority of new drug development is the result of publicly funded research. Drug companies mine that research Isn't the entire point of publicly funded research to spur scientific and economic development? Are you proposing that public research should be hidden away so that private companies don't do anything useful with it?
- licebmi__at__ 6y ago
  No, but it's to take in account where the high price (in certain poorly regulated geographies) is justified by the cost of research.

Redoubts 6y ago

That sounds like a worst-possible world, and something we really shouldn't be tolerating.

username90 6y ago

The profits from selling drugs in EU is more than enough for the cost of research. The US market prices are higher since the US market has higher sales costs (need to spend more ads and marketing dollars, and need to negotiate with all the insurers etc). Banning prescribed medicine ads and fixing the overly complicated healthcare system would help a lot keeping costs down and it wouldn't affect how much there is left over for research at all. https://truecostofhealthcare.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/PharmBG2018.png https://truecostofhealthcare.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/... https://truecostofhealthcare.org/the_pharmaceutical_industry/ https://truecostofhealthcare.org/the_pharmaceutical_industry...

JimTheMan 6y ago

Yes, because all of Europe isn't doing any research on drugs... And Japan and the UK and China and so on... That's an extremely US centric view. The market in the US is inelastic and inefficient. There's a reason why the prices are so high relative to care provided in other western countries.

Nursie 6y ago

> Another reading is, "The US drug market subsidizes the R&D for the entire rest of the world." There's no way that a decades-old, cheap to produce tropical ointment falls under that category. If you feel that a massively high price on generics is some sort of worthwhile cross-subsidy to other things... I'm not sure I agree.

Nursie 6y ago

In the case of aciclovir, which I was talking about there, it's of UK origin.