Big Pharma pigs out

[Chris]

The price of preventing preterm labor is about to go through the roof. A drug for high-risk pregnant women has cost about $10 to $20 per injection. Next week, the price shoots up to $1,500 a dose, meaning the total cost during a pregnancy could be as much as $30,000.

That's because the drug, a form of progesterone given as a weekly shot, has been made cheaply for years, mixed in special pharmacies that custom-compound treatments that are not federally approved.

But recently, KV Pharmaceutical of suburban St.Louis won government approval to exclusively sell the drug, known as Makena (Mah-KEE'-Nah). The March of Dimes and many obstetricians supported that because it means quality will be more consistent and it will be easier to get.

None of them anticipated the dramatic price hike, though — especially since most of the cost for development and research was shouldered by others in the past.

"That's a huge increase for something that can't be costing them that much to make. For crying out loud, this is about making money," said Dr. Roger Snow, deputy medical director for Massachusetts' Medicaid program

Preemie Birth Preventive Spikes From $10 To $1,500 : NPR

 

[Skull Pilot]

Maybe people who can't have a child without extensive medical intervention should consider adoption instead of demanding that companies just give their goods away.

 

[strollingbones]

no one is demanding anyone give anything away...simply wondering why something that cost 10 bucks is now 1500 bucks, for no reason other than greed.

 

[Skull Pilot]

no one is demanding anyone give anything away...simply wondering why something that cost 10 bucks is now 1500 bucks, for no reason other than greed.

If the market will bear the price then the company can charge whatever it wants.

 

[strollingbones]

will the 'market' bear it....or will the women bear children

amazing...gopers hate abortion but love money more

isnt this basically abortion by lack of funds?

 

[Skull Pilot]

will the 'market' bear it....or will the women bear children

amazing...gopers hate abortion but love money more

isnt this basically abortion by lack of funds?

I'm no GOPer. You should know that by now. And it's not any company's responsibility whether or not a person bears a child.

If a woman wants a child so badly even though there is obviously something physically wrong with her that she can't carry to term without drugs and extensive medical intervention then that's her problem and her problem alone.

 

[AVG-JOE]

This is the tell-tale line from the story:

But recently, KV Pharmaceutical of suburban St.Louis won government approval to exclusively sell the drug,​

Skull Pilot is right. All things being EQUAL, the market sets the price, but when the government creates an exclusive dealer, the government is setting the price.

If it was quality standards that they wanted, why didn't they just legislate a standard of quality that competing pharmaceutical companies would have to achieve?

 

[AVG-JOE]

There is good news:

Aetna will continue to pay for the drug, Armstrong said, but it will be an expensive pill to swallow. Aetna currently covers it for about 1,000 women a year, so the new federal endorsement is likely to cost an estimated $30 million more annually.​

Pharmaceutical Lobby -vs- Insurance Lobby​

 

[AVG-JOE]

If this government created monopoly is going to screw Aetna to to tune of $30 million, I hope We, The People are at least offered a smoke after the screwing We're going to get every time KV Pharmaceutical has intercourse with Medicaid. What a scam!

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The price of preventing preterm labor is about to go through the roof. A drug for high-risk pregnant women has cost about $10 to $20 per injection. Next week, the price shoots up to $1,500 a dose, meaning the total cost during a pregnancy could be as much as $30,000.

That's because the drug, a form of progesterone given as a weekly shot, has been made cheaply for years, mixed in special pharmacies that custom-compound treatments that are not federally approved.

But recently, KV Pharmaceutical of suburban St.Louis won government approval to exclusively sell the drug, known as Makena (Mah-KEE'-Nah). The March of Dimes and many obstetricians supported that because it means quality will be more consistent and it will be easier to get.

None of them anticipated the dramatic price hike, though — especially since most of the cost for development and research was shouldered by others in the past.

"That's a huge increase for something that can't be costing them that much to make. For crying out loud, this is about making money," said Dr. Roger Snow, deputy medical director for Massachusetts' Medicaid program

Preemie Birth Preventive Spikes From $10 To $1,500 : NPR

Those evil Democrats should be ashamed of themselves.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

will the 'market' bear it....or will the women bear children

amazing...gopers hate abortion but love money more

isnt this basically abortion by lack of funds?

Because the government stepped in and imposed a monopoly? If you have a problem with what the government did, why are you blaming the party that is not in charge?

 

[8537]

Maybe people who can't have a child without extensive medical intervention should consider adoption instead of demanding that companies just give their goods away.

This might be news to you, but the need for this drug isn't necessarily known before someone becomes pregnant.

So, maybe EVERYBODY could adopt. Problem solved!

 

[8537]

This is the tell-tale line from the story:

But recently, KV Pharmaceutical of suburban St.Louis won government approval to exclusively sell the drug,​

Skull Pilot is right. All things being EQUAL, the market sets the price, but when the government creates an exclusive dealer, the government is setting the price.

If it was quality standards that they wanted, why didn't they just legislate a standard of quality that competing pharmaceutical companies would have to achieve?

The government grants intellectual property rights every day, hundreds or thousands of times. In fact, there would be no market without granting such rights.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Maybe people who can't have a child without extensive medical intervention should consider adoption instead of demanding that companies just give their goods away.

This might be news to you, but the need for this drug isn't necessarily known before someone becomes pregnant.

So, maybe EVERYBODY could adopt. Problem solved!

So even though a woman can't naturally carry to term she shouldn't be allowed to miscarry and a company has the obligation to supply cheap drugs?

 

[8537]

Maybe people who can't have a child without extensive medical intervention should consider adoption instead of demanding that companies just give their goods away.

This might be news to you, but the need for this drug isn't necessarily known before someone becomes pregnant.

So, maybe EVERYBODY could adopt. Problem solved!

So even though a woman can't naturally carry to term she shouldn't be allowed to miscarry and a company has the obligation to supply cheap drugs?

She shouldn't be allowed to miscarry? She has every right to miscarry.

 

[Skull Pilot]

This might be news to you, but the need for this drug isn't necessarily known before someone becomes pregnant.

So, maybe EVERYBODY could adopt. Problem solved!

So even though a woman can't naturally carry to term she shouldn't be allowed to miscarry and a company has the obligation to supply cheap drugs?

She shouldn't be allowed to miscarry? She has every right to miscarry.

But if cheap drugs can prevent a miscarriage then a private company has the obligation to provide them right?

After all that is what this thread was about.

 

[USViking]

The same sort of thing happened with Colchicine, a medicine used
to treat gout.

The ancestor drug was discovered perhaps over 3000 years ago, and
the modern form in 1820, long before there was an FDA.

Usually prescribed in 0.6mg doses it is likely to have toxic if taken hourly,
but is benign and effective when taken 3-4 times per day.

Clinical trials were until recently never done on it. There was no need
for trials since the drug is one of the few in uninterrupted widespread use
going back 190 years.

Well, some whore who was running the FDA decided it would be a great
idea to hire some company to do clinicals anyway, and to give them a
monopoly of I think seven years for the trouble.

Guess what happened to the price? It went from well under a dollar a
dose to over $5.00 per dose. Speaking as a gout patient, thanks assholes.
Luckily there is another effective gout drug, Indomethacin, which is still
available cheap.

I noticed another member, a real intellectual cumwad, prattling about
how much the market will bear, etc etc etc. He did not stop to think that
the present cost is the result of government-granted monopoly, or that
other companies were happy enough with the pre-monopoly price to keep
the stuff on the market.

All I can say is I hope someday the cumwad feels the pain of an untreated
gout attack, and at a time when he is unemployed and his saving are running out.

If he is intellectually honest he will show back up here and admit he was
wrong. His type generally lacks such virtue, however, so don't expect it.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

This is the tell-tale line from the story:

But recently, KV Pharmaceutical of suburban St.Louis won government approval to exclusively sell the drug,​

Skull Pilot is right. All things being EQUAL, the market sets the price, but when the government creates an exclusive dealer, the government is setting the price.

If it was quality standards that they wanted, why didn't they just legislate a standard of quality that competing pharmaceutical companies would have to achieve?

The government grants intellectual property rights every day, hundreds or thousands of times. In fact, there would be no market without granting such rights.

Quite true, but that is not what they did. They took a drug that was not the sole property of any single drug company and imposed restrictions on its manufacture, limiting it to one plant. The fact that anyone thought this was a good idea shows how stupid government in general is.

 

[8537]

So even though a woman can't naturally carry to term she shouldn't be allowed to miscarry and a company has the obligation to supply cheap drugs?

She shouldn't be allowed to miscarry? She has every right to miscarry.

But if cheap drugs can prevent a miscarriage then a private company has the obligation to provide them right?

After all that is what this thread was about.

No, they have no obligation to provide them.

Nor does the government have any obligation to protect their intellectual property.

 

[8537]

This is the tell-tale line from the story:

But recently, KV Pharmaceutical of suburban St.Louis won government approval to exclusively sell the drug,​

Skull Pilot is right. All things being EQUAL, the market sets the price, but when the government creates an exclusive dealer, the government is setting the price.

If it was quality standards that they wanted, why didn't they just legislate a standard of quality that competing pharmaceutical companies would have to achieve?

The government grants intellectual property rights every day, hundreds or thousands of times. In fact, there would be no market without granting such rights.

Quite true, but that is not what they did. They took a drug that was not the sole property of any single drug company and imposed restrictions on its manufacture, limiting it to one plant. The fact that anyone thought this was a good idea shows how stupid government in general is.

Limiting it to one plant drove the marginal costs up by a factor of 150?