What's new
By:
Filters
Cystic Fibrosis Forum (EXP)

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Uh! Why do meds cost so much?!?!?!

N

NoExcuses

New member
"Pharmaceutical companies, on average, pay more than $26,000 per patient to run phase III clinical trials on potential products, according to the results of a recent report.

"Business intelligence firm Cutting Edge Information of Durham surveyed dozens of pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies to gauge their clinical development and spending, staffing and performance measurement practices.

"The results of the study, which is titled "Clinical Operations: Accelerating Trials, Allocating Resources and Measuring Performance," indicate that phase III trials are the most costly on a per-patient basis.

"Phase II trials are comparatively cheaper, with the average, per-patient cost totaling an average of about $19,300. Phase I trials cost about $15,700 per patient on average.

"Cutting Edge Information is a consulting firm focused on the pharmaceutical, biotechnology and medical device industries."


For all the spazzing that people do about side effects of mediciations that they take, these expensive clinical trials are meant to ensure that the risks of the med outweigh the benefit. But nothing in this life is free, my friends. Even if your government pays for things... it's still not free.

<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://phoenix.bizjournals.com/triangle/stories/2006/12/04/daily33.html
">http://phoenix.bizjournals.com...06/12/04/daily33.html
</a>
 
N

NoExcuses

New member
"Pharmaceutical companies, on average, pay more than $26,000 per patient to run phase III clinical trials on potential products, according to the results of a recent report.

"Business intelligence firm Cutting Edge Information of Durham surveyed dozens of pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies to gauge their clinical development and spending, staffing and performance measurement practices.

"The results of the study, which is titled "Clinical Operations: Accelerating Trials, Allocating Resources and Measuring Performance," indicate that phase III trials are the most costly on a per-patient basis.

"Phase II trials are comparatively cheaper, with the average, per-patient cost totaling an average of about $19,300. Phase I trials cost about $15,700 per patient on average.

"Cutting Edge Information is a consulting firm focused on the pharmaceutical, biotechnology and medical device industries."


For all the spazzing that people do about side effects of mediciations that they take, these expensive clinical trials are meant to ensure that the risks of the med outweigh the benefit. But nothing in this life is free, my friends. Even if your government pays for things... it's still not free.

<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://phoenix.bizjournals.com/triangle/stories/2006/12/04/daily33.html
">http://phoenix.bizjournals.com...06/12/04/daily33.html
</a>
 
N

NoExcuses

New member
"Pharmaceutical companies, on average, pay more than $26,000 per patient to run phase III clinical trials on potential products, according to the results of a recent report.

"Business intelligence firm Cutting Edge Information of Durham surveyed dozens of pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies to gauge their clinical development and spending, staffing and performance measurement practices.

"The results of the study, which is titled "Clinical Operations: Accelerating Trials, Allocating Resources and Measuring Performance," indicate that phase III trials are the most costly on a per-patient basis.

"Phase II trials are comparatively cheaper, with the average, per-patient cost totaling an average of about $19,300. Phase I trials cost about $15,700 per patient on average.

"Cutting Edge Information is a consulting firm focused on the pharmaceutical, biotechnology and medical device industries."


For all the spazzing that people do about side effects of mediciations that they take, these expensive clinical trials are meant to ensure that the risks of the med outweigh the benefit. But nothing in this life is free, my friends. Even if your government pays for things... it's still not free.

<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://phoenix.bizjournals.com/triangle/stories/2006/12/04/daily33.html
">http://phoenix.bizjournals.com...06/12/04/daily33.html
</a>
 
W

welshgirl

New member
amy, this is a genuine question i really want to try to understand you<img src="i/expressions/face-icon-small-confused.gif" border="0"> why do you feel the need to CONSTANTLY disrespect other countries healthcare?
 
W

welshgirl

New member
amy, this is a genuine question i really want to try to understand you<img src="i/expressions/face-icon-small-confused.gif" border="0"> why do you feel the need to CONSTANTLY disrespect other countries healthcare?
 
W

welshgirl

New member
amy, this is a genuine question i really want to try to understand you<img src="i/expressions/face-icon-small-confused.gif" border="0"> why do you feel the need to CONSTANTLY disrespect other countries healthcare?
 
N

NoExcuses

New member
1. Americans really want meds for free and speak about it all the time

2. Americans complain about their high cost of co-pays all the time (if you haven't seen the threads on this board, look it up)

3. The American government pays for presciption meds for over 10 million people in the US

4. Socialized medicine is discussed constantly in the US as the way to go. Hilary Clinton's quest in the 90s is a great example. And I'm horrified at the prospect that one day we may have that system here in the US.

5. I think many people (including myself up until a few years ago) are ignorant to the working of how medicines are developed. Since medicine development is so near and dear to all of our hearts as people with CF, I like to post interesting articles that I come across as they relate to medication development.
 
N

NoExcuses

New member
1. Americans really want meds for free and speak about it all the time

2. Americans complain about their high cost of co-pays all the time (if you haven't seen the threads on this board, look it up)

3. The American government pays for presciption meds for over 10 million people in the US

4. Socialized medicine is discussed constantly in the US as the way to go. Hilary Clinton's quest in the 90s is a great example. And I'm horrified at the prospect that one day we may have that system here in the US.

5. I think many people (including myself up until a few years ago) are ignorant to the working of how medicines are developed. Since medicine development is so near and dear to all of our hearts as people with CF, I like to post interesting articles that I come across as they relate to medication development.
 
N

NoExcuses

New member
1. Americans really want meds for free and speak about it all the time

2. Americans complain about their high cost of co-pays all the time (if you haven't seen the threads on this board, look it up)

3. The American government pays for presciption meds for over 10 million people in the US

4. Socialized medicine is discussed constantly in the US as the way to go. Hilary Clinton's quest in the 90s is a great example. And I'm horrified at the prospect that one day we may have that system here in the US.

5. I think many people (including myself up until a few years ago) are ignorant to the working of how medicines are developed. Since medicine development is so near and dear to all of our hearts as people with CF, I like to post interesting articles that I come across as they relate to medication development.
 
E

Ender

New member
Give me a break. The only reason your meds cost so much in your country is because you LET it cost so much...

Don't you think it's kinda funny that when your pharmaceutical companies develop new drugs, they charge you an arm and a leg for the "brand name" version, yet market the generic version around the world, including Canada.

Ya they cost a lot to develop, but big whoop. How much money do they get from these drugs. It's disgusting...

socialized, private, in the end, does it really make a difference? You do know our life expectancy is higher then yours right?
 
E

Ender

New member
Give me a break. The only reason your meds cost so much in your country is because you LET it cost so much...

Don't you think it's kinda funny that when your pharmaceutical companies develop new drugs, they charge you an arm and a leg for the "brand name" version, yet market the generic version around the world, including Canada.

Ya they cost a lot to develop, but big whoop. How much money do they get from these drugs. It's disgusting...

socialized, private, in the end, does it really make a difference? You do know our life expectancy is higher then yours right?
 
E

Ender

New member
Give me a break. The only reason your meds cost so much in your country is because you LET it cost so much...

Don't you think it's kinda funny that when your pharmaceutical companies develop new drugs, they charge you an arm and a leg for the "brand name" version, yet market the generic version around the world, including Canada.

Ya they cost a lot to develop, but big whoop. How much money do they get from these drugs. It's disgusting...

socialized, private, in the end, does it really make a difference? You do know our life expectancy is higher then yours right?
 
N

NoExcuses

New member
1. I truely believe that if pharma companies couldn't reap profits that the they do in the US (which is the only place on the planet where they can) pharma R&D would be drastically reduced. If it takes $1 billion to bring a drug to the market through the US FDA, and there isn't a way to re-coup those costs, then comapnies simply will stop the R&D. So I am aware of the fact that companies charge different prices in different countries. But I am willing to pay what I do in the US because I believe that costs have to be re-couped somehow.

2. Profit margins from drugs vary quite a bit. I see where you're going with this though. Some are a few billion a year like Lipitor and others are only a few million a year like Pulmozyme. But if you look at profit margins of pharma companies, they aren't too different than other industries. R&D must go on. So the billinos that Pfizer has made from Lipitor, in 2005, the company spent $7.4 billion in paying scientists in the lab to find new drugs or to conduct safety trials before bringing the drug to the market. Pfizer has an inhalable insulin now that will make some Type I diabetes' lives much easier. Eraxis just came to market to treat Candida, a fungal infection that can afflict transplant patients. The list goes on and on regarding the research that's being done with the profits.

3. Life expectancy with regards to CF or with regards to the general population? I'm sure it's higher in Canada for the general public because you all probably aren't as fat as we are and I think you all work less hours so you have a lot less stress-related issues (cardio). A lot goes into life expectancy other than just pharmaceuticals. So I'm not quite sure where you're going with your statement there....


The bottomline really is that the United States subsidizes pharmaceutical research for the rest of the world. I'd rather that than no research at all. But Americans do need to understand the consequences. That's all I'm sayin'.
 
N

NoExcuses

New member
1. I truely believe that if pharma companies couldn't reap profits that the they do in the US (which is the only place on the planet where they can) pharma R&D would be drastically reduced. If it takes $1 billion to bring a drug to the market through the US FDA, and there isn't a way to re-coup those costs, then comapnies simply will stop the R&D. So I am aware of the fact that companies charge different prices in different countries. But I am willing to pay what I do in the US because I believe that costs have to be re-couped somehow.

2. Profit margins from drugs vary quite a bit. I see where you're going with this though. Some are a few billion a year like Lipitor and others are only a few million a year like Pulmozyme. But if you look at profit margins of pharma companies, they aren't too different than other industries. R&D must go on. So the billinos that Pfizer has made from Lipitor, in 2005, the company spent $7.4 billion in paying scientists in the lab to find new drugs or to conduct safety trials before bringing the drug to the market. Pfizer has an inhalable insulin now that will make some Type I diabetes' lives much easier. Eraxis just came to market to treat Candida, a fungal infection that can afflict transplant patients. The list goes on and on regarding the research that's being done with the profits.

3. Life expectancy with regards to CF or with regards to the general population? I'm sure it's higher in Canada for the general public because you all probably aren't as fat as we are and I think you all work less hours so you have a lot less stress-related issues (cardio). A lot goes into life expectancy other than just pharmaceuticals. So I'm not quite sure where you're going with your statement there....


The bottomline really is that the United States subsidizes pharmaceutical research for the rest of the world. I'd rather that than no research at all. But Americans do need to understand the consequences. That's all I'm sayin'.
 
N

NoExcuses

New member
1. I truely believe that if pharma companies couldn't reap profits that the they do in the US (which is the only place on the planet where they can) pharma R&D would be drastically reduced. If it takes $1 billion to bring a drug to the market through the US FDA, and there isn't a way to re-coup those costs, then comapnies simply will stop the R&D. So I am aware of the fact that companies charge different prices in different countries. But I am willing to pay what I do in the US because I believe that costs have to be re-couped somehow.

2. Profit margins from drugs vary quite a bit. I see where you're going with this though. Some are a few billion a year like Lipitor and others are only a few million a year like Pulmozyme. But if you look at profit margins of pharma companies, they aren't too different than other industries. R&D must go on. So the billinos that Pfizer has made from Lipitor, in 2005, the company spent $7.4 billion in paying scientists in the lab to find new drugs or to conduct safety trials before bringing the drug to the market. Pfizer has an inhalable insulin now that will make some Type I diabetes' lives much easier. Eraxis just came to market to treat Candida, a fungal infection that can afflict transplant patients. The list goes on and on regarding the research that's being done with the profits.

3. Life expectancy with regards to CF or with regards to the general population? I'm sure it's higher in Canada for the general public because you all probably aren't as fat as we are and I think you all work less hours so you have a lot less stress-related issues (cardio). A lot goes into life expectancy other than just pharmaceuticals. So I'm not quite sure where you're going with your statement there....


The bottomline really is that the United States subsidizes pharmaceutical research for the rest of the world. I'd rather that than no research at all. But Americans do need to understand the consequences. That's all I'm sayin'.
 
S

Scarlett81

New member
I think both systems have big problems. There is no question that healthcare in the us is under fire-there are real problems with it here. I'm sure that is the same all over the world. There's pluses and minuses to each system.
At least cfers in Canada, the USA, Britian and much of Europe have access to care. Think of Rami in the middle east or the billions of people in India and Africa that have nuttin at all. For me, that puts it in perspective. If i have to pay 25 bucks for copay, fine. I know, I know it adds up and its all relative. But its also how you look at it.
 
S

Scarlett81

New member
I think both systems have big problems. There is no question that healthcare in the us is under fire-there are real problems with it here. I'm sure that is the same all over the world. There's pluses and minuses to each system.
At least cfers in Canada, the USA, Britian and much of Europe have access to care. Think of Rami in the middle east or the billions of people in India and Africa that have nuttin at all. For me, that puts it in perspective. If i have to pay 25 bucks for copay, fine. I know, I know it adds up and its all relative. But its also how you look at it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top