US consumers have been shouldering the cost for the development of US medications used around the world. US presidents have known this for decades. Trump is the first one to do anything about it.
About Time
- Donald R. McClarey
Donald R. McClarey
Cradle Catholic. Active in the pro-life movement since 1973. Father of three, one in Heaven, and happily married for 43 years. Small town lawyer and amateur historian. Former president of the board of directors of the local crisis pregnancy center for a decade.
To pay for Research and Development my prescription cost $600.00 a dose. My nurse called the doctor and got an over the counter drug for $7.00. The drug store did not even carry the drug.
Some drugs are over a thousand dollars a dose.
We’ll see how this turns out. My understanding of the situation is that other countries will refuse to pay any higher prices regardless, so the high US prices are the main/only reason the development of new medications happens at the pace it does (and possibly at all).
I certainly won’t be complaining if drug costs come down, but if other countries refuse to pull their own weight–and unlike with Trump’s pressure on NATO contributions, there’s no treaty obligation to hold over their head–there’s a real possibility that stagnation in medical R&D will be the non-monetary price we pay for it.
The US is vastly overmedicated.
If demand goes down, the price goes down. Maybe one common sense approach could be outlawing commercials for pharmaceuticals? What other country allows this?
CAG
The US is vastly overmedicated.
If demand goes down, the price goes down. Maybe one common sense approach could be outlawing commercials for pharmaceuticals? What other country allows this?
You can blame the Supreme Court for this and for lawyer advertising in it’s liberal / RINO past makeup. It’s commercial free speech don’t you know? Spare me. I’ve almost completely stopped watching regular television because the only commercials you see are irritating lawyer and pharmaceutical ads. And oh yeah. You also get PSAs paid for with taxpayer dollars to make sure that we stop doing whatever thing they want us to stop based upon the Panic du jour. Having been on the purchasing side of that in the past I can tell you that huge amounts of money are going into that advertising propping up the media that hates the country.
LKL:
Yeah, I’m no fan of lawyer commercials, they’re annoying, but at least they’re advertising to their potential clients. That’s legitimate. Pharma companies aren’t advertising to doctors (the only people who can actually write the prescriptions), they’re advertising to patients. Assuming doctors have integrity and don’t just write unnecessary prescriptions to make paying customers happy, there’s no legitimate (read: corruption-free) reason for those pharmaceutical commercials to air.
I’ve never had a particular problem with pharma ads. Nor with lawyers. They’re annoying, sure, yet the alternative would be worse. Freedom of Speech should mean precisely that: You are free to say what you wish. I’ve long been quite disgusted with how the courts have chosen to interpret an Act about civil rights. Supposedly, it forbids discrimination based on race, sex, religion, or creed, yet the courts have been quite “creative” about that. Seems they feel discrimination is OK, so long as it benefits women or minorities, or whomever the special interest group of the day might be. They vaguely agree that we ought have a level playing field, yet they seem determined they “level” means something different.
LKL:
At least the pharma commercials speak to adverse reactions. The fine print most patients do not bother to read if the doctor prescribes the drug.
[…] Political Analysis, Punditry, and News:About Time – Donald R. McClarey, J.D., at The American CatholicCutting the Gordian Knot of Birthright […]