@helaineolen EpiPen’s a regulatory problem; FDA makes it hard to get generic competitors approved. I agree we should fix.— (((Megan McArdle))) (@asymmetricinfo) August 23, 2016
@matthewherper In general, when we see this kind of pricing behavior, we look for a bottleneck.— (((Megan McArdle))) (@asymmetricinfo) August 23, 2016
@matthewherper It’s very unusual for companies to be able to raise prices like that.— (((Megan McArdle))) (@asymmetricinfo) August 23, 2016
Nobody forced Mylan to raise the prices sky-high. They took advantage of a temporary opportunity to enrich themselves to an obscene degree. So did many other companies with their own drugs, as we have seen recently.
Obviously, it was and is possible. McArdle's arguments are incredibly lazy; she has no pride in her sycophancy at all.@matthewherper Even a crappy competitor, like pre-filled syringes, would make it impossible to charge those prices.— (((Megan McArdle))) (@asymmetricinfo) August 23, 2016
She asserts but never proves.@matthewherper My assertion is that many of these screw ups have been introduced by regulations & regulatory agencies.— (((Megan McArdle))) (@asymmetricinfo) August 23, 2016
McArdle also wants to offload drug company expenses on the taxpayer.
@matthewherper I know! This is stupid and should be fixed! My crazy idea is that all clinical testing should be done by FDA.— (((Megan McArdle))) (@asymmetricinfo) August 23, 2016
A nominal fee, no doubt. After all, you wouldn't want to lower drug prices and destroy innovation, would you?@matthewherper And you could charge pharma to do the trials.— (((Megan McArdle))) (@asymmetricinfo) August 23, 2016
Too bad we didn't know the only innovation would be in the pricing.
FFS Megan, the reason there aren't more reasonably priced generic meds isn't because of regulation, it's because of patent law. See Ben Goldacre's Bad Pharma - drug companies have an impressive variety of tricks to extend their patents and stop competition. And even if that wasn't the case, the nature of human biology is such that the generic might not work for everyone.
She really, really does not want to understand this, does she?
It's getting a little weird. Why is she so invested in drug company profits?
EpiPens aren't patented - they combine plain old epinephrine with an injector technology developed by the Defense department. There is another maker, Adrenaclick. (There were more, but some companies stopped due to quality control issues) Mylan's innovation has consisted in lobbying for requirements to stock the things, confusing doctors into writing prescriptions that can't be filled with the alternatives, and making the instructions sufficiently different that there's a training problem.
I remain confused as to how a company could maintain such a stranglehold on a product that the government developed. It can happen with orphan drugs, but how the hell could Mylan lock everyone out of manufacturing something that's basic, readily developed and widely needed?
CEO's dad is a Senator? I bet Mylan pays their lobbyists a LOT! They were cunning and slick, and amazingly greedy.
And, once again: there is *no evidence* of higher intelligence or ability there. Just conscienceless greed. (Arglebargle's insistence that the .1% work harder, or are smarter or more gifted... really rankles. She herself is a good example of mediocrity extolled.
Mylan is about to get hammered: I am a volunteer emt and our agency just switched to syringes. NY State has opened the door for the use of syringe delivered epi for its field personnel. For us, it was a simple matter of $500 vs $15.
... and it is a matter of time before someone comes up with a way to deliver epi sublingually.
But Megan's defense of high drug prices will only last until she needs to carry an epi-pen. Then it will be Obamacare's fault that she has to pay $500 for it.
She is always about herself - as we all have well understood. She doesn't have allergies so she couldn't care less about epi pen. But she is obviously terrified of cancer, so she writes this:
I think that many of Herper's suggestions, such as considering how prices should be adjusted when drugs turn out to have a wider market than initially anticipated, will help.
On April 12, 1955 — in the immediate wake of Salk’s polio vaccine discovery — journalist Edward R. Murrow asked the scientist who owned the patent for his vaccine, reports Slate. Replied Salk: “Well, the people, I would say. There is no patent. Could you patent the sun?” In a pharmaceutical industry that is even today wracked with profiteering, Salk’s desire to keep his invention a public commodity is a testament to his heroism in a time of desperate need. Salk developed the polio vaccine out of a goal to help humankind — not to profit off the lives or deaths of millions.
Post a Comment