- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Cost Of Life-Saving EpiPen Injectors Soars To $700 A Set
Posted on 8/22/16 at 11:02 am to Darth_Vader
Posted on 8/22/16 at 11:02 am to Darth_Vader
Must depend on your insurance. I just bought a set and paid about $100.
0
Posted on 8/22/16 at 11:02 am to yoga girl
quote:
Oh, you KNOW there is collusion - "you don't compete with my product and we won't compete with your product."
I'm sick of greedy corporations gouging us - time to fight back.
How does that "theory" work with the two epipen competitors that were eliminated by the FDA?
If there is collusion in this market, it's your beloved federal government doing so via the FDA.
Posted on 8/22/16 at 11:03 am to baldona
This is why people are buying their medications in Mexico and Canada because these price points are a small fraction for same medication.
Posted on 8/22/16 at 11:04 am to yoga girl
quote:
I'm sick of greedy corporations gouging us - time to fight back.
Invent your own medicine and you won't need to buy this product.
Posted on 8/22/16 at 11:05 am to yoga girl
quote:
I'm sick of greedy corporations gouging us - time to fight back.
She says, ignoring the fact two competitors were not allowed in the market.
Posted on 8/22/16 at 11:06 am to Salmon
quote:
government regulation is exactly why there are not more competitors
Yes and no.
It's certainly true that FDA approval is sort of like having a goverment-granted monopoly. This could be addressed in much the same way we do with utilities - require that prices also get approval.
Of course, that has its own set of problems, such as regulatory capture. And let's face it, the government is not always very good at determining what is best for the consumer.
Another alternative is to simply stop requiring FDA approval. Then prices could adjust far more rapidly. Of course then people would scream that we need government oversight to prevent dangerous products from getting out there.
It isn't a simple situation, at any rate.
Posted on 8/22/16 at 11:08 am to foshizzle
quote:
Another alternative is to simply stop requiring FDA approval.
Posted on 8/22/16 at 11:09 am to PatDyesPants
quote:I don't need to buy it, I'm not allergic to anything. $700 is a lot of money to a lot of people, and it is outrageous.
Invent your own medicine and you won't need to buy this product.
I would put a price control on it at $50.
If it costs $1, that is plenty of profit.
Posted on 8/22/16 at 11:10 am to lsu13lsu
quote:
If they barely make a profit on this drug they will not have money or incentive to invest in new drugs that we will need
I'm not defending this particular price hike, but you're right. Looking at the marginal cost of the product is not a sensible way to judge the price.
Possible solutions to the problem of prohibitive cost for life-saving medicine:
1. Government control of price = reduced incentive to spend the money on R&D = fewer breakthrough medicines
2. Government control of production = ????. Hard to say, but skepticism would be justified.
Those don't seem like good solutions.
The only solution I see is for these companies to be more generous.
Posted on 8/22/16 at 11:11 am to MSMHater
quote:
How does that "theory" work with the two epipen competitors that were eliminated by the FDA?
If there is collusion in this market, it's your beloved federal government doing so via the FDA.
Everybody knows that the FDA is in the pocket of big pharmacy.
The FDA doesn't create price controls. We need price controls, not more FDA.
Posted on 8/22/16 at 11:12 am to uway
quote:
I'm not defending this particular price hike, but you're right. Looking at the marginal cost of the product is not a sensible way to judge the price.
I don't think you understand economics. When the epipens first came out, they were inexpensive. The R and D was done. In fact, the price should go down as medicines often do. Instead, they just figured out they could extort the higher price with help from the pharmacy controlled FDA.
Posted on 8/22/16 at 11:13 am to SLafourche07
quote:
UNLESS the government is keeping out competitors.
How about the fact the company's CEO is the daughter of US Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV)?
Posted on 8/22/16 at 11:14 am to yoga girl
So if the FDA, a government entity, is in the pocket of big Pharma, then the government entity is not operating as designed. We assume corporations are in it for the money, but we also assume government is here to protect us. Is it worse for an entity to operate as designed or to violate the public trust?
Posted on 8/22/16 at 11:15 am to Ghost of Colby
quote:
How about the fact the company's CEO is the daughter of US Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV)?
Wow! Now I see what is happening here.
Posted on 8/22/16 at 11:15 am to yoga girl
quote:
Everybody knows that the FDA is in the pocket of big pharmacy.
The FDA doesn't create price controls. We need price controls, not more FDA.
Everyone knows that big government is corrupt.
So we need more government regulations to reign in the current corruption in big government?
I'm so confused
ETA:
quote:
I don't think you understand economics.
Oh dear...
This post was edited on 8/22/16 at 11:17 am
Posted on 8/22/16 at 11:16 am to yoga girl
quote:
Everybody knows that the FDA is in the pocket of big pharmacy.
The FDA doesn't create price controls. We need price controls, not more FDA.
this logic "well we know big pharm owns the FDA, so what we need is more government agencies to control big pharm, because big pharm would never buy those as well"
Posted on 8/22/16 at 11:16 am to Jcorye1
quote:
So if the FDA, a government entity, is in the pocket of big Pharma, then the government entity is not operating as designed. We assume corporations are in it for the money, but we also assume government is here to protect us. Is it worse for an entity to operate as designed or to violate the public trust?
I don't disagree, but the answer is NOT less regulation - it is regulation by those who can be trusted and who aren't corrupted by money.
A new regulatory scheme is needed.
Posted on 8/22/16 at 11:17 am to Darth_Vader
Buy it online from another country. Last time I bought some while overseas and paid like $1 per ampulla/dose.
Posted on 8/22/16 at 11:19 am to yoga girl
quote:
The FDA doesn't create price controls. We need price controls, not more FDA.
You know the best way to get price controls? Competition.
quote:
Everybody knows that the FDA is in the pocket of big pharmacy.
So, we need the government to come in and stop the government from being in the pocket of big pharmacy? How exactly is that going to work again?
Posted on 8/22/16 at 11:20 am to yoga girl
quote:
it is regulation by those who can be trusted and who aren't corrupted by money.
Who would that be?
Page 3 of 14
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News