6 ms·

>insulin is unaffordable In large part due to regulation. Reflexively adding more regulations to deal with the negative effects of existing regulations is lik

• DarkNova6 11mo ago
  The bug occurs because of the power discrepancy of those who have the demand and those of who can supply. For some reason, the problem if insulin prices and absurd health costs only exist in the US. I wonder why.
  • pipes 11mo ago
    The power to charge what you want comes from lack of competition. Regulation can make entry into a market too high, especially for small start ups. Ensuring that regulation is necessary and as straight forward as possible to comply with is good for consumers.
    • rusk 11mo ago
      > competition We don’t need competition in insulin production. It is a know quantity with fixed and closed quality parameters. Fix the price and let suppliers compete on cost.
      • pastage 11mo ago
        There are many kinds of insulin variants on the market. The easy way to differentiate them is by release rate and duration. Gone in an hour for some and 24hours for others. There are other factors as well that make them incompatible with each other.
        • rusk 11mo ago
          All clearly categorised and regulated. Fill the boxes and ship em and STFU
      • purple_turtle 11mo ago
        The problem in USA is that producing insuline is so regulated that setting up and maintaining production is obnoxiously expensive. Note that if you cause by regulation or stupid laws something to be expensive to produce/import and then make it illegal to sell above that price - then you will get shortages. As noone will want to produce insuline if required paperwork costs more than it's selling price. Note that even if currently adding more regulation to solve problems caused by more regulation will not cause it, it may happen in future. US healthcare regulations are on Nth round of that.
        • rusk 11mo ago
          > setting up and maintaining production is obnoxiously expensive. This is what I meant by compete on cost. The manufacturers that are best at cutting these costs will make the most profit. That’s where competition should be focused on such generic items.
          • mexicocitinluez 11mo ago
            None of this is while insulin is so expensive in the US. None of it. We've been producing insulin for 100 years now. You guys are just making things up and it's wild. I don't think a single person who is claiming that regulation is driving up insulin prices has even Googled it to make sure what they're saying makes sense. Spoiler alert: It's not. The cost of insulin is a result of monopolies, pharmacy benefit managers, patents, and most importantly: a LACK of regulation on drug prices.
        • fragmede 11mo ago
          We will have to wait see where it goes, but California is trying to make their own insulin, so starting January 1st, 2025 you can buy a pack for $55 a as a resident.
          • purple_turtle 11mo ago
            2026?
      • sophrosyne42 11mo ago
        Nothing has fixed and closed quality parameters. At least not if your concern is quality as understood by the people who want or need insulin as opposed to whatever arbitrary standard a bureaucrat could make up.
        • rusk 11mo ago
          > whatever arbitrary standard a bureaucrat You do know these people are scientific experts and have teams of scientific experts working for them, right. It’s not some blazing skulls stuffed shirt lol
          • sophrosyne42 11mo ago
            No amount of scientific expertise will turn a subjective thing (which is what product quality is) into an objective thing. Credible, ethical, and well-trained scientists should be able to recognize that and desist from dressing up their preferences into scientific dress and passing it off as the results of objective science.
            • rusk 11mo ago
              > subjective thing There is nothing subjective about insulin quality you dimwit
              • sophrosyne42 11mo ago
                The quality of a product is subjective to the user of that product. This is a scientific fact of economics, and insistence otherwise is science denial.
                • rusk 11mo ago
                  That’s why we have regulation LOL toxicity is not subjective Oh Lordy what has become of HN a load of fresh dummies with no grounding in the basic principles of libertarianism. All the fire none of the intellect. Just no sport.
      • pipes 11mo ago
        That would ensure that it is extremely unlikely we get innovation in insulin production as it removes the financial incentive to take the risk with innovation.
        • zbentley 11mo ago
          People don't innovate to compete on cost?
    • DarkNova6 11mo ago
      The barrier for entry is primarily capital these days: have a moat, prevent competition, extract money, cease R&D. And if a competitor does come up, just buy them outright. This is the current economic model, as it is practiced by Private Equity. Power has become infectious and capitalism has changed. The game is about power and extracting more and more money from the productive economy, making it less competitive. Who wins? Those who already have excessive capital. The only one who would have enough legal power is exclusively the state. It’s no surprise the state is under attack from so many fronts.
    • littlestymaar 11mo ago
      > The power to charge what you want comes from lack of competition Competition alone is never good enough to make price down, because companies and shareholders hate competition and will happily “consolidate” competitive markets into much more profitable oligopolies (when it's not straight monopolies).
    • gorbachev 11mo ago
      You could make an argument that the problem is entirely due to bad regulation, because the regulations haven't mandated effective enforcement. I don't know if this applies to insulin production, but in several other areas enforcing anti-monopoly regulations is lacking at such a degree that the regulations are almost completely ignored.
  • sophrosyne42 11mo ago
    Power discrepancy is not a category of pricing. The price is high because the supply is constrained relative to demand. And in this case, regulations cause a restriction of supply.
• complex_pi 11mo ago
  The EU also has regulations, but somehow it does not make insulin as expensive as in the US. Maybe the existence of a regulation is not the issue here.
  • 0xDEAFBEAD 11mo ago
    I'm not against the existence of regulation, nor is the OP. I'm against bad regulation. The US healthcare system is a gigantic regulatory morass.
    • mexicocitinluez 11mo ago
      Explain how the "gigantic regulatory morass" led to higher insulin costs?
      • inglor_cz 11mo ago
        Government capture by big players who promote heavy regulation in order to eliminate smaller competition?
        • AnimalMuppet 11mo ago
          I worked for a large company that did devices used in surgery. They regarded FDA regulation as a moat that kept out all but large, established competitors. Note that I am not saying that they tried to push (or worse, capture) regulators to achieve that end. I'm just saying that they didn't mind.
        • mexicocitinluez 11mo ago
          > Government capture by big players who promote heavy regulation in order to eliminate smaller competition? This is a meaningless statement without specifics. It has absolutely nothing concrete in it that would actually inform someone about what drives insulin production. It's a wrong and overly simplifies. Are you really saying the regulations regarding the actual production of insulin is what drives up costs? We've been manufacturing insulin for > 100 years now. And can you find a single resource that agrees with your assessment? When you say "big players", you mean the top 3 right? Would regulating monopolies in the pharmaceutical industry maybe be a good thing? Why do other counties pay less if it costs so much to make? Why does regulation in the US make US consumers pay more but not Europe, for example? Do you think PBM's have any part to play in this? What about over-zealous patents by the monopoly at the top? Do you have any actual experience in this field or are you just parroting talking points?
• eric-burel 11mo ago
  If you are an European, regulation also has the benefit to induce soft protectionism from countries that are less keen on consumer and environment protection. This is the heart of the debate about Mercorsur, as it creates an unfair competition by lowering regulation (in theory european regulation applies but in practice it's harder to verify), and also an internal debate in France related to some pesticide that other European countries can use. Some argue that we should allow the pesticide, some that we should stop importing products that are exposed to it.
  • 0xDEAFBEAD 11mo ago
    Why not just have a single regulation, that products must be clearly labeled by their country of origin, and let consumers decide the rest?
    • dbdr 11mo ago
      Maybe because people don't have unlimited amount of time to keep up-to-date on all data and research on toxicity, negative health effects, safety, etc on tens of thousands of products from a couple hundred countries.
      • 0xDEAFBEAD 11mo ago
        Any product could apply for regulatory approval in the country where it is being sold. If the product does not get regulatory approval, it could be sold in a special shop, so customers are aware that they are taking a risk. That lets customers choose for themselves whether they want to take the risk.
    • StopDisinfo910 11mo ago
      Because people don't look at country of origin. They are mostly price sensitive. If you allow imports from countries with looser regulations, you are basically putting your own sectors at a competitive disavantage in your own market. It's akin to killing it basically. It's obviously extremely stupid but in the case of the Mercosur agreement, predictably Germany doesn't care because the agribusiness is in France and they themselves will be able to export their cars. Generally speaking, Germany never cares about deeply shafting the rest of the union when it gives them a small advantage. See also how their economy is deeply unbalanced, they have under invested for decades and they only survive because they are part of a monetary union devoid of a fiscal union giving them the tremendous advantage of an undervalued currency at the expense of basically every southern members. See also how they made joining the currency union mandatory for entering the common market and are pushing for adding more poor eastern countries to exploit which also conveniently vote for the EPP and dillute any chance the southern countries could ally to oppose them. Obviously, the currency union has no clear path to exit it.
• mexicocitinluez 11mo ago
  > In large part due to regulation. Wait, what? With this type of claim I was sure you were going to back it up with at least some evidence but apparently I was wrong. I'm sorry, but the irony in this comment too much. The reason insulin is so high is because of a lack of regulation. If the government took a stronger stance towards monopolies in the pharma industry, this wouldn't be happening. If the government REGULATED insulin prices, it wouldn't be so high. If the government reigned in PBMs, it wouldn't be so high. IF the government reigned in patents and the tricks drug companies play with them, it wouldn't be so high.
  • tastyfreeze 11mo ago
    I don't think that price fixing by government should be allowed in any situation. Reducing barriers to entry and a tough stance on monopolies has the result of lowering prices without distorting the market with an artificial set price.
    • mexicocitinluez 11mo ago
      > I don't think that price fixing by government should be allowed in any situation You're confusing fixing with negotiating. The govt provides healthcare. They pay for the meds. Are you saying the government shouldn't be allowed to negotiate what it pays for it's own insurance????
      • tastyfreeze 11mo ago
        I was responding to a comment that said "regulating insulin prices". Regulating and negotiating are not the same. Regulation is the government using its power to dictate the price a seller is allowed to sell a product for (price fixing). Negotiation means the pharmaceutical company can just say no if the government offers a price that is too low. Or maybe you are thinking that government force is "negotiating". Something along the lines of give us this price or we make it illegal for you to do "x". Or, alternatively, we will allow you to do "x" if you give us this price. While that is technically negotiating it is malignant government behavior known as coercion.
• coredog64 11mo ago
  When most people think of insulin, they think it's the same medication isolated over 100 years ago and it's just big Pharma sticking it to people by charging anything more than a couple of bucks. There are side effects and downsides to insulin, and all of these expensive versions are attempts at reducing/eliminating side effects. In 49 US states, you can walk into a Walmart with $25 and walk out with a vial of insulin, no prescription necessary. For $75, you can get a much newer Novo Nordisk analog insulin.
• contagiousflow 11mo ago
  I'm guessing you're American? What regulations make it expensive in America but affordable in other parts of the world?