The law vs the greater good

[Matt1970]

We did some work at Bristol Myers Squibb last year and the place is a ghost town as far as drug manufacturing/R&D and it's all thanks to Canadian drugs. Love it or hate it those companies employed a lot of people and kept the money in America. How many jobs are we going to sell out for cheaper drugs? I thought we learned this lesson before?

 

[spacejamz]

We all know this. Company makes money, there is no problem there.

But if a company in India can make life saving drugs at a fraction of the price as the big companies, you do not see price gouging there?

How can company A sale a pill for 50 cents, but company B wants to charge $100 for the same exact pill?

So how can Company A afford to develop the next new wonder drug (I don't even know how much R&D for something like that would even cost) if they are being undercut?

Why would they want to?

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

Healthcare for profit is fine. The problem with the current system is it's healthcare for PROFIT.

 

[soulcougher73]

But people cant survive spending 10+ hours a day without making enough $$ for a living. Add on the debt most of them come out of school with and the high cost of practicing medicine insurance...

Add in all the great lawsuits many seem to get, its no wonder the doctor count in this country is small, and shrinking.

Oh i agree. There is a lot screwed up that leads to the problem. School being too expensive, lawyers etc. But nothing wrong with a Dr. only making 50-100k range over their career. Especially when the work itself should be the rewarding part.

This is all my opinion though on what could create a better world/healthcare system. Get money out of lots of things and lets do things for the right reasons instead of greed.

 

[soulcougher73]

He's no worse than you. Are you in Africa, saving lives?

Am i a doctor? No. I do work to bring clean water and power all around the world if that helps your conscience.

Im a caring compassionate agnositc athiest though.

 

[Texashiker]

So how can Company A afford to develop the next new wonder drug (I don't even know how much R&D for something like that would even cost) if they are being undercut?

Why would they want to?

So they can not meet in the middle at $50?

The company in india does not have to worry about meeting wall street expectations, or stock prices, or board of directors, or angry stock holders,,,.

Isn't there a time limit on drug patents? Something like 10 years?

 

[Pr0d1gy]

The doctor prices is also a reflection of how expensive and inflated schooling costs have become. Along with all the lawsuits that happen in this country, when half if not more are ridiculous. This casues an increase of practice of medicine insurance which means and increase on their prices to offset.

Yes, the lawsuits have a big part in it. Obviously, with regards to the drugs alone, this could be seriously curtailed by the FDA simply doing the job they were created for and tasked with. Instead, they float plenty of very dangerous drugs and those become the mainstream prescription because the pharma company is greasing the doctors prescribing them, which usually end in a huge class action lawsuit against the pharma company, thus skyrocketing costs of their other more useful drugs that actually benefit the truly sick.

It's all one big, sick cycle of abuse.

 

[spacejamz]

So they can not meet in the middle at $50?

The company in india does not have to worry about meeting wall street expectations, or stock prices, or board of directors, or angry stock holders,,,.

Isn't there a time limit on drug patents? Something like 10 years?

Does meeting in the middle cover the R&D costs of the company and enough to satisfy the investors so they keep investing?

It is pretty shitty that is what it comes down to but until we get to the Star Trek Utopian society of the future where no one needs money and everyone pulls their weight in society, this won't be changing any time soon...

 

[nehalem256]

We all know this. Company makes money, there is no problem there.

But if a company in India can make life saving drugs at a fraction of the price as the big companies, you do not see price gouging there?

How can company A sale a pill for 50 cents, but company B wants to charge $100 for the same exact pill?

Because company A does not have to pay to develop it. They stole the design from company B.

Oh i agree. There is a lot screwed up that leads to the problem. School being too expensive, lawyers etc. But nothing wrong with a Dr. only making 50-100k range over their career. Especially when the work itself should be the rewarding part.

This is all my opinion though on what could create a better world/healthcare system. Get money out of lots of things and lets do things for the right reasons instead of greed.

So when there are not enough doctors I hope you will volunteer to go to the end of the line

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

Yes, the lawsuits have a big part in it. Obviously, with regards to the drugs alone, this could be seriously curtailed by the FDA simply doing the job they were created for and tasked with. Instead, they float plenty of very dangerous drugs and those become the mainstream prescription because the pharma company is greasing the doctors prescribing them, which usually end in a huge class action lawsuit against the pharma company, thus skyrocketing costs of their other more useful drugs that actually benefit the truly sick.

It's all one big, sick cycle of abuse.

Those lawsuits don't drive up costs. They are largely a consequence of keeping profits high. Pharma Co's lose less money settling the lawsuits than paying for the quality and safety controls or pulling drugs altogether to prevent them. The FDA doesn't do it's job, but it's to Pharma's benefit.

 

[Texashiker]

Does meeting in the middle cover the R&D costs of the company and enough to satisfy the investors so they keep investing?

It is pretty shitty that is what it comes down to but until we get to the Star Trek Utopian society of the future where no one needs money and everyone pulls their weight in society, this won't be changing any time soon...

Drug companies give a lot of drugs away. So I can not say they are all bad.

I just wish there was a better way to get affordable medicines to the people in need.

Because company A does not have to pay to develop it. They stole the design from company B.

Robin Hood situation, stealing from the rich to give to the poor.

 

[xj0hnx]

In that line of work curing/healing people should be the rewards.

Yea, because last time I checked landlords will take a good feeling instead of rent.

 

[Moonbeam]

I don't think this debate is phrased properly. The question I would ask is, if your child were dying and you were also too poor to take her to a doctor, but you owned a knife and a doctor lived next door, would you present him with some free surgery of your own if he wouldn't treat her without pay?

These kinds of intellectual debates, in my opinion, always deal with the ethics of alternatives when, in fact they should seek deeper. What is it about the system that creates them. Is the system not really the problem.

Isn't a desire for money a desire for security? Why do we create a system in which folk can grow up insecure. Why do our brightest minds go into wall street instead of medical research? Why do we have a system that rewards saleability rather than altruistic ideals of utility of function. Why do we not have research hospitals that reward folk who seek ways to improve life with life long security. Why isn't the societal support of folk who return the greatest blessings to people our highest ideal. I think it's fear and insecurity and the hate we for those with whom we have to compete to survive. It's always us against them instead of us for us. When you put these kinds of holes in children's souls they forever after can never fill their emotional needs. The emptiness and insecurity drives them.

 

[Pr0d1gy]

Those lawsuits don't drive up costs. They are largely a consequence of keeping profits high. Pharma Co's lose less money settling the lawsuits than paying for the quality and safety controls or pulling drugs altogether to prevent them. The FDA doesn't do it's job, but it's to Pharma's benefit.

The FDA is not there for their benefit, it's for ours to protect us from predatory practices by big business....which they are not doing. Then the same predatory business can claim "costs" due to the lawsuit payouts and gouge the consumer even more, further greasing the wheels of the vicious cycle I mentioned before.

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

The FDA is not there for their benefit, it's for ours to protect us from predatory practices by big business....which they are not doing.

To Pharma's benefit. Regardless of what the FDA is supposed to be, it's largely a revolving door for Pharma business people who ain't there to look out for the average citizen. And while I'm certainly not advocating that it be done away with, this does need to be acknowledged and fixed.

Then the same predatory business can claim "costs" due to the lawsuit payouts and gouge the consumer even more, further greasing the wheels of the vicious cycle I mentioned before.

Oh sure that's what they claim. But then no one is stopping them from voluntarily doing themselves what a well-working FDA would otherwise force them to do. And if it was profitable to do so, they would. The lawsuits are just a cost of profit maximizing.

 

[Pr0d1gy]

To Pharma's benefit. Regardless of what the FDA is supposed to be, it's largely a revolving door for Pharma business people who ain't there to look out for the average citizen. And while I'm certainly not advocating that it be done away with, this does need to be acknowledged and fixed.



Oh sure that's what they claim. But then no one is stopping them from voluntarily doing themselves what a well-working FDA would otherwise force them to do. And if it was profitable to do so, they would. The lawsuits are just a cost of profit maximizing.

Exactly. It's just another profit over country/mankind business.

 

[the DRIZZLE]

Yes, yes, and yes.

But, when you need something to stay alive, should a company be allowed to charge whatever they want?

What right does a company have to control your life?

And its not just your life, its public health in general. Tuberculosis is still out there, killing people everyday.

If you give them a patent, then yes they should be able to charge whatever they want. If you want to change the rules going forward don't complain when no one invests in new drugs. Remember these compounds wouldn't exist in the first place unless the drug companies made the upfront investment.

Another point is that the drug companies do sell aids drugs at huge discounts to clinics in Africa.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

Exactly. It's just another profit over country/mankind business.

That's what you get when you have the greediest of the greedy business people controlling healthcare instead of doctors, researchers, scientists, pharmacists, etc. PROFIT instead of profit.

 

[Pr0d1gy]

That's what you get when you have the greediest of the greedy business people controlling healthcare instead of doctors, researchers, scientists, pharmacists, etc. PROFIT instead of profit.

Yup. 'Murica, fuck yeah!

 

[Texashiker]

Isn't a desire for money a desire for security? Why do we create a system in which folk can grow up insecure.

What is it with you and security? Where you abused as a child? Maybe you wanted to be abused but it never happened?

Money is not about security, its about having nice things.

 

[Capt Caveman]

Yes, yes, and yes.

But, when you need something to stay alive, should a company be allowed to charge whatever they want?

What right does a company have to control your life?

And its not just your life, its public health in general. Tuberculosis is still out there, killing people everyday.

A company may spend $1 billion dollars and a decade to develop a drug. 1 out of 10 drugs come to market. For the company to continue to exist and develop future drugs, it needs to recoup it's costs, payback investors and have money for future R&D.

 

[soulcougher73]

Yea, because last time I checked landlords will take a good feeling instead of rent.

Strawman that has nothing to do with anything.

Typical.

 

[PokerGuy]

What right does a company have to control your life?

What right do you have to steal someone's property? Do the companies (or anyone for that matter) have an obligation to provide you with free or cheap stuff just because you need it? Do you let people steal your stuff because they need it?

 

[PokerGuy]

Get money out of lots of things and lets do things for the right reasons instead of greed.

Bwahahahahahah... you are either unbelievably naive or simply stupid.

 

[Texashiker]

What right do you have to steal someone's property? Do the companies (or anyone for that matter) have an obligation to provide you with free or cheap stuff just because you need it? Do you let people steal your stuff because they need it?

This is not like stealing a computer or a car. The only thing the drug company is being denied is possible higher profits. The key word there is "possible". If the people can not afford to buy the drugs, then there is no profit to be made.

In the case of medicine, does the law serve a select few, or does the law uphold the good of the public?

I suspect that patenting medicine does both. Companies get to make money, while people get to live better lives.

But what do we do when people can not afford medicine? Here in the states the government provides TB treatment free of charge. That is because it is in the publics best interest that TB patients get treated. You would not want someone working at a grocery store coughing TB germs everywhere.

Why do public health clinics provide low cost vaccines? Because its in the publics best interest.

So what harm is there is some company making low cost drugs that the people would not be able to afford otherwise?

A valid law should uphold the good of the public before protecting profits of a select few. Drug company makes 400 million instead of 500 million. Ok, so what? The company still made money, people get cheap drugs, everyone should be happy.

But its not that simple. This is about the drug companies keeping a strangle hold on the people who need the medicine.