Socialized Medicine and Ungodly Expensive Drugs

[DGS49]

A good friend of mine is an elderly man with a couple different forms of cancer. One might say he is just playing out the string and he would be lucky to last another year.

His doctor advised him last week that there is a new drug available that "has shown great promise" in slowing the progress of the types of cancer he has, and could very well give him another year or two of life. The drug is a monthly injection and costs about $1,200 per shot. Because it is still "experimental," his insurance won't cover it.

He has the resources to buy this drug - his other drugs cost him several hundred dollars a month in co-pays - and he will get it filled as long as he can.

But what would happen under these circumstances in, for example, Canada, GB, or Sweden? Would they even have access to such a drug? Would it be paid for without question by the national health service?

I also wonder what would happen to a Medicaid patient in the U.S. Would it even be "on the table" as an option?

Anyone reading this have any insights?

 

[pknopp]

Drugs are cheaper in Canada which is why any move to allow them to be legally imported is always blocked.

 

[odanny]

There is also a new drug out for early stage Alzheimers, just approved, it cost $26,000 a year. Insurance companies will decide who gets approved, depending on what stage your Alzheimer's is at.

Want to get this approved? All I can say is good luck with that.

 

[pknopp]

There is also a new drug out for early stage Alzheimers, just approved, it cost $26,000 a year. Insurance companies will decide who gets approved, depending on what stage your Alzheimer's is at.

Want to get this approved? All I can say is good luck with that.

IMO, unless a drug can reasonably be accessed by the masses and afforded by the masses, it shouldn't be approved.

 

[Moonglow]

The VA pays for it willingly, at Medicare rates.

 

[odanny]

IMO, unless a drug can reasonably be accessed by the masses and afforded by the masses, it shouldn't be approved.

That's not how medicine works in America, and we both know that. I am in agreement with you, but our government won't help us (well, it has tried to, but Republicans block any and all attempts)

Perhaps the "free market" will step in, but how long before greed corrupts the entire "free market" of selling prescription medications? Maybe Bezos or Cuban give it a start, but I don't see it lasting very long before medication is unaffordable thru them as well.

 

[pknopp]

That's not how medicine works in America, and we both know that. I am in agreement with you, but our government won't help us (well, it has tried to, but Republicans block any and all attempts)

Cory Booker blocks all attempts.

Cory Booker Joins Senate Republicans to Kill Measure to Import Cheaper Medicine From Canada

Perhaps the "free market" will step in, but how long before greed corrupts the entire "free market" of selling prescription medications? Maybe Bezos or Cuban give it a start, but I don't see it lasting very long before medication is unaffordable.

No one is willing to address the cost side of drugs.

 

[occupied]

As a current cancer patient I have to say that I would reject such last ditch efforts because I've never heard of these exotic drugs actually working. Seems more like an effort to recoup their losses on something that didn't really work out.

 

[odanny]

Cory Booker blocks all attempts.

Interesting, thanks. I wonder how he explains that to his constituents? All it takes, in an evenly divided Senate, is one sell out. Or Manchinema.

 

[pknopp]

Interesting, thanks. I wonder how he explains that to his constituents? All it takes, in an evenly divided Senate, is one sell out. Or Manchinema.

He is funded by NJ big pharma.

 

[SweetSue92]

A good friend of mine is an elderly man with a couple different forms of cancer. One might say he is just playing out the string and he would be lucky to last another year.

His doctor advised him last week that there is a new drug available that "has shown great promise" in slowing the progress of the types of cancer he has, and could very well give him another year or two of life. The drug is a monthly injection and costs about $1,200 per shot. Because it is still "experimental," his insurance won't cover it.

He has the resources to buy this drug - his other drugs cost him several hundred dollars a month in co-pays - and he will get it filled as long as he can.

But what would happen under these circumstances in, for example, Canada, GB, or Sweden? Would they even have access to such a drug? Would it be paid for without question by the national health service?

I also wonder what would happen to a Medicaid patient in the U.S. Would it even be "on the table" as an option?

Anyone reading this have any insights?

Americans pay these prices because we subsidize the rest of the world.

 

[DGS49]

No actual answers on point?

What would happen in Canada? Would he get the drug "free"?

 

[odanny]

No actual answers on point?

You're asking a hypothetical question.

 

[Coyote]

No actual answers on point?

What would happen in Canada? Would he get the drug "free"?

Each country you mention in the OP has different types of healthcare plans and they all have options for those who can afford it, to pay out of pocket.

Here is what it says for Canada.

Prescription drug insurance coverage - Canada.ca

Where and how drugs are funded.

www.canada.ca

 

[Couchpotato]

Drugs are cheaper in Canada which is why any move to allow them to be legally imported is always blocked.

Yes, but countries like Canada ride on the coat tails of countries like the US. Drug companies would likely never develop those "cheap" drugs in the first place because there would be no way for them to recuperate the money they spent doing so if all countries were like Canada. You'll notice all the tropical diseases that have been around for decades and decades that the drug companies haven't developed drugs for. Ever wonder why? It's not because drug companies are racists it's because there's no way for them to even break even on such a proposition let alone make money on them. If everyone utilizing these drugs paid their actual "fair share" the drugs would be more affordable for everyone.

 

[Couchpotato]

IMO, unless a drug can reasonably be accessed by the masses and afforded by the masses, it shouldn't be approved.

Hope you're happy with the current slate of available drugs then. Companies likely wont take the risk and capital investment it takes to develop a new drug under those conditions.

 

[pknopp]

Yes, but countries like Canada ride on the coat tails of countries like the US. Drug companies would likely never develop those "cheap" drugs in the first place because there would be no way for them to recuperate the money they spent doing so if all countries were like Canada. You'll notice all the tropical diseases that have been around for decades and decades that the drug companies haven't developed drugs for. Ever wonder why? It's not because drug companies are racists it's because there's no way for them to even break even on such a proposition let alone make money on them. If everyone utilizing these drugs paid their actual "fair share" the drugs would be more affordable for everyone.

Can you list these diseases because, no I haven't seen anything about that.

 

[pknopp]

Hope you're happy with the current slate of available drugs then. Companies likely wont take the risk and capital investment it takes to develop a new drug under those conditions.

If people can't afford them, what good is it to produce them?

 

[Couchpotato]

If people can't afford them, what good is it to produce them?

What did a flat screen TV cost in 2000? Are flat screen TV's more or less accessible to the average consumer now or then? All products when first introduced are available to those with money. Those people pay the majority of the recoup cost for the luxury of having access to that product first. It allows the company producing that product to gauge popularity and if mass production of that product would make any sense. Why would it be any different for drugs? They are essentially just a product.

If J&J develops a drug to do X but they have to be able to mass produce it and provide it at a cost that everyone can afford it in order to get FDA approval before they know if anyone will even really want it, what do you think the chances are they ever even start development on that drug? 0? A little less than that?

The Process and Costs of Drug Development (2022) | FTLOScience

Did you know that developing a single drug can cost over US$2 billion? We break down the process and costs of drug development in 2022.

ftloscience.com

"Bringing a new drug to market in 2022 costs US$2 billion across 14 years of development. This process includes drug discovery, pre-clinical and clinical trials, regulatory filings and post-marketing surveillance."


Who is fronting that money? You?

 

[Couchpotato]

Can you list these diseases because, no I haven't seen anything about that.

Types of Neglected Tropical Diseases

Neglected tropical diseases (NTDs) comprise several diseases that have a range of effects, from extreme pain to permanent disability to death. Here are some examples: Ascariasis Caused by a parasitic roundworm called Ascaris lumbricoides, ascariasis is common in areas where sanitation and...

www.niaid.nih.gov

What Are the Neglected Tropical Diseases?

There are 21 neglected tropical diseases found in 150 countries worldwide—all of which disproportionately affect the poor.

www.verywellhealth.com

"The World Health Organization (WHO) formally recognizes at least 21 infections as NTDs, each of which has its own distinct causes, symptoms, and methods of transmission. The one thing they all have in common, however, is that they overwhelmingly affect the poor."