9 ms·

Or you could do what literately every other country in the world does, and have price controls.

tastygreenapple 6y ago
There's a huge hidden cost to price controls through - they don't promote innovation as much as markets do. The US develops over half the world's new pharmaceuticals, if we imposed price controls today, we would have fewer life saving medications tomorrow because the companies couldn't afford to do as much R&D.
- watwut 6y ago
  I think that there are Americans who don't feel like volunteering to pay money they don't have food drugs they need for that.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- gmadsen 6y ago
  well considering we already subsidize the early R&D for these companies with our University system, and insulin hasn't changed in 50 years, I see no reason we can't price control certain drugs. Could even use this as a guide https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WHO_Model_List_of_Essential_Medicines https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WHO_Model_List_of_Essential_Me...
  - RHSeeger 6y ago
    > insulin hasn't changed in 50 years That is false. The insulins sold today are MUCH better than the ones sold 50 years ago. They're much better than the ones sold 25 years ago. Admittedly, the ones sold 25 years ago are effective, but it is much more convenient using an insulin that kicks in in 15-20 minutes and has a relatively short peak than one that kicks in in 30-60 minutes and has a long peak. It's doable either way, but the quality of life is much different.
    - wetpaws 6y ago
      Pretty sure people who's only other alternative is death would be fine with the old and slightly less effective insulin
      - RHSeeger 6y ago
        I agree with you 100%. I was only addressing the statement that insulin hadn't changed in 50 years.
  - renewiltord 6y ago
    Trivially untrue, right? Recombinant DNA technology is younger than 50 years so we used porcine insulin before that. It'll still work, honestly, if you're up for it.
- Reason077 6y ago
  If drugs are too expensive, then at some point more lives/quality of lives are lost because people can't access them than are saved from more drug development. A balance must be found between ensuring fair access at affordable prices, and ensuring fair returns to the pharma industry. This is precisely the goal of pharmaceutical price regulation in the UK: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pharmaceutical_Price_Regulation_Scheme https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pharmaceutical_Price_Regulatio...
- heavyset_go 6y ago
  Much of drug R&D is funded through the NIH.
- tshaddox 6y ago
  Let's make sure people in their 20s aren't dying because they can't afford insulin before we start worrying about how to promote innovation in the insulin market.
  - golemiprague 6y ago
    More people will die if you don't have medicines to solve their issues, blood sugar level is not the only problem young people have. Other countries don't solve the issue by putting an artificial price on it, they just import cheap generic alternatives and use their negotiation power because they buy it for the whole country which is universally insured. The US got bigger insurance pools than many other countries just because of the country size but as people explained before, due to regulations and inefficiencies in the market they can't utilise other cheaper suppliers. At the end of the day, medicines got certain costs to develop and produce and people who buy it have to pay this cost one way or another plus some profit.
- badrequest 6y ago
  What innovation does insulin production for diabetics require?
nickff 6y ago
You're talking about introducing another layer of complexity on top of an already Byzantine system. Price controls come with many issues, such as incentivizing lobbying & corruption, as well as dis-incentivizing market entry & long-term investment, resulting in a lack of capital expenditures which causes inefficient production. Healthcare is complicated, and we need to simplify it as much as possible; this is a great example of a situation where we could use 'simple rules for a complex world'.[1] [1] https://hbr.org/2012/09/simple-rules-for-a-complex-world https://hbr.org/2012/09/simple-rules-for-a-complex-world
- jakelazaroff 6y ago
  Sure, our healthcare system is crazy. But is healthcare really inherently complicated? This is a solved problem basically everywhere else in the world.
  - heleninboodler 6y ago
    The problem is that everywhere else in the world doesn't have the delusion that unfettered capitalism and healthcare are compatible. The US manages to pick and choose socialistic policies in some areas, and I'm more or less just waiting for them (us) to come around to the view that basic healthcare is just one of those things that everyone needs in order to have a decent shot at life so you might as well just provide it as a blanket service.
    - marcusverus 6y ago
      The US system is far from perfect, but blaming its dysfunction on 'unfettered capitalism' is absurd. The US healthcare system is among the most heavily regulated industries in the US economy. Among those regulations are FDA policies that give Big Pharma monopolies on new drugs. The FDA extends these monopolies for decades, allowing companies to operate as state-created monopolies. Once the state-created monopoly times out, competitors face a years-long approval process before they can market a generic version of an already approved drug.

There's a huge hidden cost to price controls through - they don't promote innovation as much as markets do. The US develops over half the world's new pharmaceuticals, if we imposed price controls today, we would have fewer life saving medications tomorrow because the companies couldn't afford to do as much R&D.

watwut 6y ago
I think that there are Americans who don't feel like volunteering to pay money they don't have food drugs they need for that.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
gmadsen 6y ago
well considering we already subsidize the early R&D for these companies with our University system, and insulin hasn't changed in 50 years, I see no reason we can't price control certain drugs. Could even use this as a guide https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WHO_Model_List_of_Essential_Medicines https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WHO_Model_List_of_Essential_Me...
- RHSeeger 6y ago
  > insulin hasn't changed in 50 years That is false. The insulins sold today are MUCH better than the ones sold 50 years ago. They're much better than the ones sold 25 years ago. Admittedly, the ones sold 25 years ago are effective, but it is much more convenient using an insulin that kicks in in 15-20 minutes and has a relatively short peak than one that kicks in in 30-60 minutes and has a long peak. It's doable either way, but the quality of life is much different.
  - wetpaws 6y ago
    Pretty sure people who's only other alternative is death would be fine with the old and slightly less effective insulin
    - RHSeeger 6y ago
      I agree with you 100%. I was only addressing the statement that insulin hadn't changed in 50 years.
- renewiltord 6y ago
  Trivially untrue, right? Recombinant DNA technology is younger than 50 years so we used porcine insulin before that. It'll still work, honestly, if you're up for it.
Reason077 6y ago
If drugs are too expensive, then at some point more lives/quality of lives are lost because people can't access them than are saved from more drug development. A balance must be found between ensuring fair access at affordable prices, and ensuring fair returns to the pharma industry. This is precisely the goal of pharmaceutical price regulation in the UK: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pharmaceutical_Price_Regulation_Scheme https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pharmaceutical_Price_Regulatio...
heavyset_go 6y ago
Much of drug R&D is funded through the NIH.
tshaddox 6y ago
Let's make sure people in their 20s aren't dying because they can't afford insulin before we start worrying about how to promote innovation in the insulin market.
- golemiprague 6y ago
  More people will die if you don't have medicines to solve their issues, blood sugar level is not the only problem young people have. Other countries don't solve the issue by putting an artificial price on it, they just import cheap generic alternatives and use their negotiation power because they buy it for the whole country which is universally insured. The US got bigger insurance pools than many other countries just because of the country size but as people explained before, due to regulations and inefficiencies in the market they can't utilise other cheaper suppliers. At the end of the day, medicines got certain costs to develop and produce and people who buy it have to pay this cost one way or another plus some profit.
badrequest 6y ago
What innovation does insulin production for diabetics require?

nickff 6y ago

You're talking about introducing another layer of complexity on top of an already Byzantine system. Price controls come with many issues, such as incentivizing lobbying & corruption, as well as dis-incentivizing market entry & long-term investment, resulting in a lack of capital expenditures which causes inefficient production. Healthcare is complicated, and we need to simplify it as much as possible; this is a great example of a situation where we could use 'simple rules for a complex world'.[1] [1] https://hbr.org/2012/09/simple-rules-for-a-complex-world https://hbr.org/2012/09/simple-rules-for-a-complex-world

jakelazaroff 6y ago
Sure, our healthcare system is crazy. But is healthcare really inherently complicated? This is a solved problem basically everywhere else in the world.
- heleninboodler 6y ago
  The problem is that everywhere else in the world doesn't have the delusion that unfettered capitalism and healthcare are compatible. The US manages to pick and choose socialistic policies in some areas, and I'm more or less just waiting for them (us) to come around to the view that basic healthcare is just one of those things that everyone needs in order to have a decent shot at life so you might as well just provide it as a blanket service.
  - marcusverus 6y ago
    The US system is far from perfect, but blaming its dysfunction on 'unfettered capitalism' is absurd. The US healthcare system is among the most heavily regulated industries in the US economy. Among those regulations are FDA policies that give Big Pharma monopolies on new drugs. The FDA extends these monopolies for decades, allowing companies to operate as state-created monopolies. Once the state-created monopoly times out, competitors face a years-long approval process before they can market a generic version of an already approved drug.