,000% price increase then decrease for HIV medication
09-22-2015, 11:27 PM
Quote: (09-22-2015 11:21 PM)Thomas the Rhymer Wrote:
Quote: (09-22-2015 11:02 PM)kaotic Wrote:
He did this fair and square, no matter how outrageous it can be.
This should be a more wide opening case on how big pharma prices meds and how insurance works incahoots with them.
I love how everyone's outraged at these pill prices, it's like we forgot about the AIDS virus in Africa, noone gives a shit about it.
We should be having a larger discussion on health reform, and I don't mean Obamacare.
To be honest, I don't understand the business sense of the decision.
The molecule isn't under patent. The only reason no one is bothering to make the drug is because the manufacturer was already making it too cheap to compete.
In India, according to Wikipedia, the generic form of the drug costs US$0.10 - ten cents a tab. However, in the UK, its a lot more expensive - it's a whole 66 cents a tab.
Really, pushing up the price to $750 is just going to invite rival companies to engage in geo-arbitrage - you can buy the same drug already pretty cheap in other places in the world (i.e. you don't need to do R&D, build a factory, etc; the infrastructure already exists). The only obstacle is the FDA, which has to register any generic drug as an equivalent. But with prices of $750 vs 10c, the FDA will be under a lot of public pressure to expedite the process.
TL;DR: Pushing the price up that high on a molecule that is not under patent doesn't make sense, given the worldwide availability of cheap versions.
Therein lies the rub against the, otherwise very valid, "Pro Capitalism!" slant. The patent I believe is expired? It's anyones game now. Those who believe in the free hand of the market, do have some valid points but they must explain away FDA (regulatory) approval of medicines before they are available in the market.