• halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    177
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    These drugs were developed with public funds and yet are sold at outrageous pricing.

    If the pharma industry was at all reasonable about their pricing, this wouldn’t be a consideration at all.

    If you take public funds, you can’t charge exorbitant amounts. Seems an easy trade-off decision for them to make.

    • oDDmON@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      54
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      ^ This. R&D in PharmaWorld means mergers and acquisitions; the real moneymakers they scrape from public research, tweak and then charge for.

    • CaptainSpaceman@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      1 year ago

      If you take public funds, you can’t charge exorbitant amounts. Seems an easy trade-off decision for them to make.

      Damn I wish that were true. Telecoms got like $4bn decades ago to upgrade American infra…

      • halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 year ago

        Not only then, they’re allowed to recoup deployment costs as separate surcharges, not part of plan costs, and they’re still charging for infrastructure they already completed decades ago.

        • Serinus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Add about 15% to the sticker price of any cell phone plan because of taxes and those fees.

  • TheaoneAndOnly27@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    61
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Please do it to Eliquis. My fucking insurance just jumped it up to 275 a month.

    Edit: also, I don’t have anybody to vent this too. But the hospital just called and I have to have another heart surgery In 22 days. I had open heart surgery 9 months ago. I’m just so fucking tired

  • Aviandelight @mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    1 year ago

    Omg yes!!! I was just ranting the other day that all these drug shortages should come with consequences to the companies. (Looking at you Ozempic) If you can’t produce enough of your drug to keep up with demand then other companies should get a chance at making it. It shouldn’t be the patients that have to suffer.

    • Rapidcreek@reddthat.comOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      More than that, think of private equity looking for quick and destructive ways to make a buck, including buying the rights to cheap but essential drugs that have been on the market for decades and jacking up the price 5-fold. That is really driving prices in the 2000s. Them boys are already started running away.

  • Mnemnosyne@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    The administration will not endorse the widespread use of march-in rights, and is not expected to take action against any individual medicines, said the people familiar with the matter, who were granted anonymity to discuss internal decision making.

    Important bit from that, lest anyone think they’re actually going to do something.

    I would be delighted if they did, but I would also be very surprised if they actually assert these rights on medicines developed with public funds, which is what they should do - just all of the medicines developed with public funds, patents seized, end of story.

    • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Important bit from that, lest anyone think they’re actually going to do something.

      They’ll expect us to rejoice as though we can afford the meds our taxes paid to research anyway.