3 ms·

How is the system broken? This drug wouldn't even exist if they weren't able to charge such a high price for it. And nothing is preventing the government or oth

How is the system broken? This drug wouldn't even exist if they weren't able to charge such a high price for it. And nothing is preventing the government or other organizations from also researching drugs. It's not mutually exclusive and it's unlikely two labs would discover the exact same drug.

mindslight 13y ago
They're charging much more than the cost to develop the drug, because they need to pay for all of their failed attempts (and at this point, the only constraint is when the insurance companies will balk). And if they're able to charge this indefinitely, then they're effectively just extracting rent regardless of how much goes into further research (which you can say that they've earned the right to do this, but that's still what they're doing). I'm certainly not saying they shouldn't be compensated, but taking issue with they way they're compensated. As I said, the problem is that it's an extreme gamble, and the only thing this is conducive to is business gamers and the overhead and blindspots they bring. Since the current reimbursement mechanism completely relies on the utterly artificial construction of the patent system, it's reasonable to believe that the entire model could be redesigned.
- Houshalter 13y ago
  Failed drugs are part of the cost of getting working drugs. And it's not indefinitely - it's until the patent expires, or in this case until other treatments start getting on the market in a few years.
  - mindslight 13y ago
    You are nitpicking specifics that don't actually change what I'm saying while completely ignoring the crux of my point.
    - Houshalter 13y ago
      What's the crux of your point? How would you prefer the system work? As I said, it's not mutually exclusive. You can have government funding and subsidies without getting rid of private research or patents.
- jahooma 13y ago
  But how could it be any other way? Isn't it an inherent gamble to develop drugs since most of the drug-creation attempts are bound to fail? You could just pay researchers to "try" to come up with drugs, regardless of whether they get results, but that doesn't seem like it would work very well. Is there any other way to smooth out the rewards?

mindslight 13y ago

They're charging much more than the cost to develop the drug, because they need to pay for all of their failed attempts (and at this point, the only constraint is when the insurance companies will balk). And if they're able to charge this indefinitely, then they're effectively just extracting rent regardless of how much goes into further research (which you can say that they've earned the right to do this, but that's still what they're doing). I'm certainly not saying they shouldn't be compensated, but taking issue with they way they're compensated. As I said, the problem is that it's an extreme gamble, and the only thing this is conducive to is business gamers and the overhead and blindspots they bring. Since the current reimbursement mechanism completely relies on the utterly artificial construction of the patent system, it's reasonable to believe that the entire model could be redesigned.

Houshalter 13y ago
Failed drugs are part of the cost of getting working drugs. And it's not indefinitely - it's until the patent expires, or in this case until other treatments start getting on the market in a few years.
- mindslight 13y ago
  You are nitpicking specifics that don't actually change what I'm saying while completely ignoring the crux of my point.
  - Houshalter 13y ago
    What's the crux of your point? How would you prefer the system work? As I said, it's not mutually exclusive. You can have government funding and subsidies without getting rid of private research or patents.
jahooma 13y ago
But how could it be any other way? Isn't it an inherent gamble to develop drugs since most of the drug-creation attempts are bound to fail? You could just pay researchers to "try" to come up with drugs, regardless of whether they get results, but that doesn't seem like it would work very well. Is there any other way to smooth out the rewards?