7 ms·

Only the last one makes the distinction between modern synthetics and basic insulin. Frankly the US pays for the cost of the research while the rest of the wor

Only the last one makes the distinction between modern synthetics and basic insulin. Frankly the US pays for the cost of the research while the rest of the world just pays for the cost of production. If you want to fix the cost of insulin products (and many other drugs) in the US you need to figure out how to make everybody else pay for the true costs. Edit: also your last source there doesn't even know what it's talking about Novolin is a generic brand name for 3 distinct products that have distinct pricing.

lostlogin 3y ago
The argument that the US is paying for everyone else’s drugs is often made in defence of big pharma, but their profits make it hard to swallow. In recent times the US hasn’t really shown any other other signs of chasing socialist policy where it subsidises the rest of the world.
- hackernewds 3y ago
  perhaps most of the research would not be incentivized in a socialist society? it's not like the talent doesn't exist elsewhere, but US embrace of capitalism is a factor in the research development research.
ToucanLoucan 3y ago
> Frankly the US pays for the cost of the research while the rest of the world just pays for the cost of production. Oh come the fuck on, this has been the talking point since the early 2000's. Surely nobody still believes this horse shit. Phizer by itself raked in 50 billion last year alone.
- lostlogin 3y ago
  It comes up here in NZ every few years, as there is frustration that we aren’t paying as much as the drug companies would like. The US leaned on us hard to scrap our single payer system. This sympathy for these massive companies in this thread depressing. Big Agg and Big Tech don’t get this free pass.
  - ToucanLoucan 3y ago
    It was depressing in 2008, now it's just pathetic. It's no wonder they feel so emboldened to continue fucking people raw for their medications, they have hordes of defenders in government and otherwise ready to offer page upon page of apologia for their rampant profiteering.
- pstrateman 3y ago
  Pfizer's world wide net income was $2.12bn USD in 2023. I guarantee you 100% of that came from the united states.
  - aaomidi 3y ago
    Okay? Then if the US starts changing its policy they won’t make stupid deals with the rest of the world then.
  - votepaunchy 3y ago
    Pfizer net income for 2023 by quarter. After taking in 10s of billions in vaccine profits this certainly looks like some fun accounting. 2023-12-31 $-3,369 2023-09-30 $-2,382 2023-06-30 $2,327 2023-03-31 $5,543 https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/PFE/pfizer/net-income https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/PFE/pfizer/net-inc...
mitthrowaway2 3y ago
The history of insulin shows a great deal of involvement and progress made by researchers in several countries, and the US would probably not even rank as first among them.
- pstrateman 3y ago
  Eli Lilly was the first commercial producer of insulin at any significant scale. Genentech developed biosynthetic human insulin using engineered ecoli. Eli Lilly produced the first of the modern synthetic insulin analogs. Literally every major breakthrough except the initial bovine extracts were done in the US.
  - RealityVoid 3y ago
    Novo Nordisk is based in Denmark and they did a lot of research. Of course, cherry picking the stuff Eli Lilly brought first makes it seem they are the ones driving the thing forward but it only makes sense in the wider contact and when compared with what other have done first as well.
    - hackernewds 3y ago
      Novo piggybacked on a ton of research especially with metformin done in the US. Let's not be delusional that Denmark is a bastion of cutting edge biological research
      - RealityVoid 3y ago
        > Novo piggybacked Isn't this how research and science works? > Let's not be delusional that Denmark is a bastion of cutting edge biological research Except in this case, it is? All I read seems to point they did push the envelope a lot of times. Do you have some other reason to say this except "psht, get real, it's Denmark"
FireBeyond 3y ago
> Frankly the US pays for the cost of the research while the rest of the world just pays for the cost of production. Top 10 pharma companies, 5/10 are US (2 UK, 2 Swiss, 1 French). 4 of the top 6 for profit margins (from 43%(!) to 19%) are US (Merck is the only outlier, 9th, at 10%). 4 of the top 5 for Sales and Marketing Spend (both on raw dollars and as a percentage of revenue) are US. 3 of the bottom 5 for R&D spend (as a percentage of revenue) are US. Source: http://www.bbc.com/news/business-28212223 http://www.bbc.com/news/business-28212223
- Wytwwww 3y ago
  That's a 10 year old article. Although if we rank by market cap top 6 are from the US these days (by revenue 5 out 10 seem to be European) so not much has seemingly changed (besides Novo Nordisk becoming the second most valuable pharma company out of nowhere)
  - paulmd 3y ago
    > That's a 10 year old article. Although [the] top 6 are from the US these days […] so not much has seemingly changed Well, thanks for the update. Correcting a citation an out-of-date article that is - as you admit - apparently still relevant as cited was definitely worth everyone’s time.
    - Wytwwww 3y ago
      The very specific figures from that comment are obviously not really correct. e.g. Pfizer's profit margin in 2023 was ~3.5% which isn't that great (and that's the largest pharma company by revenue).
- lostlogin 3y ago
  Keep in mind that marketing is a bit complicated - very few countries allow direct to consumer marketing. I think kits just the US and New Zealand. Obviously there would still be marketing in other countries, but a heavy US presence likely skews things. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct-to-consumer_advertising https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct-to-consumer_advertisi...

lostlogin 3y ago

The argument that the US is paying for everyone else’s drugs is often made in defence of big pharma, but their profits make it hard to swallow. In recent times the US hasn’t really shown any other other signs of chasing socialist policy where it subsidises the rest of the world.

hackernewds 3y ago
perhaps most of the research would not be incentivized in a socialist society? it's not like the talent doesn't exist elsewhere, but US embrace of capitalism is a factor in the research development research.

ToucanLoucan 3y ago

> Frankly the US pays for the cost of the research while the rest of the world just pays for the cost of production. Oh come the fuck on, this has been the talking point since the early 2000's. Surely nobody still believes this horse shit. Phizer by itself raked in 50 billion last year alone.

lostlogin 3y ago
It comes up here in NZ every few years, as there is frustration that we aren’t paying as much as the drug companies would like. The US leaned on us hard to scrap our single payer system. This sympathy for these massive companies in this thread depressing. Big Agg and Big Tech don’t get this free pass.
- ToucanLoucan 3y ago
  It was depressing in 2008, now it's just pathetic. It's no wonder they feel so emboldened to continue fucking people raw for their medications, they have hordes of defenders in government and otherwise ready to offer page upon page of apologia for their rampant profiteering.
pstrateman 3y ago
Pfizer's world wide net income was $2.12bn USD in 2023. I guarantee you 100% of that came from the united states.
- aaomidi 3y ago
  Okay? Then if the US starts changing its policy they won’t make stupid deals with the rest of the world then.
- votepaunchy 3y ago
  Pfizer net income for 2023 by quarter. After taking in 10s of billions in vaccine profits this certainly looks like some fun accounting. 2023-12-31 $-3,369 2023-09-30 $-2,382 2023-06-30 $2,327 2023-03-31 $5,543 https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/PFE/pfizer/net-income https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/PFE/pfizer/net-inc...

mitthrowaway2 3y ago

The history of insulin shows a great deal of involvement and progress made by researchers in several countries, and the US would probably not even rank as first among them.

pstrateman 3y ago
Eli Lilly was the first commercial producer of insulin at any significant scale. Genentech developed biosynthetic human insulin using engineered ecoli. Eli Lilly produced the first of the modern synthetic insulin analogs. Literally every major breakthrough except the initial bovine extracts were done in the US.
- RealityVoid 3y ago
  Novo Nordisk is based in Denmark and they did a lot of research. Of course, cherry picking the stuff Eli Lilly brought first makes it seem they are the ones driving the thing forward but it only makes sense in the wider contact and when compared with what other have done first as well.
  - hackernewds 3y ago
    Novo piggybacked on a ton of research especially with metformin done in the US. Let's not be delusional that Denmark is a bastion of cutting edge biological research
    - RealityVoid 3y ago
      > Novo piggybacked Isn't this how research and science works? > Let's not be delusional that Denmark is a bastion of cutting edge biological research Except in this case, it is? All I read seems to point they did push the envelope a lot of times. Do you have some other reason to say this except "psht, get real, it's Denmark"

FireBeyond 3y ago

> Frankly the US pays for the cost of the research while the rest of the world just pays for the cost of production. Top 10 pharma companies, 5/10 are US (2 UK, 2 Swiss, 1 French). 4 of the top 6 for profit margins (from 43%(!) to 19%) are US (Merck is the only outlier, 9th, at 10%). 4 of the top 5 for Sales and Marketing Spend (both on raw dollars and as a percentage of revenue) are US. 3 of the bottom 5 for R&D spend (as a percentage of revenue) are US. Source: http://www.bbc.com/news/business-28212223 http://www.bbc.com/news/business-28212223

Wytwwww 3y ago
That's a 10 year old article. Although if we rank by market cap top 6 are from the US these days (by revenue 5 out 10 seem to be European) so not much has seemingly changed (besides Novo Nordisk becoming the second most valuable pharma company out of nowhere)
- paulmd 3y ago
  > That's a 10 year old article. Although [the] top 6 are from the US these days […] so not much has seemingly changed Well, thanks for the update. Correcting a citation an out-of-date article that is - as you admit - apparently still relevant as cited was definitely worth everyone’s time.
  - Wytwwww 3y ago
    The very specific figures from that comment are obviously not really correct. e.g. Pfizer's profit margin in 2023 was ~3.5% which isn't that great (and that's the largest pharma company by revenue).
lostlogin 3y ago
Keep in mind that marketing is a bit complicated - very few countries allow direct to consumer marketing. I think kits just the US and New Zealand. Obviously there would still be marketing in other countries, but a heavy US presence likely skews things. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct-to-consumer_advertising https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct-to-consumer_advertisi...