• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

EpiPen Price Rise[W:398]

prometeus said:
What is it with some pharma companies are they being taken over by douche bags?
Forbes Welcome
Click to expand...
I guess the question should be, how long does the patent last on the injector.
Just as soon as it expires, someone will have a cheaper on on the market.
 
longview said:
I guess the question should be, how long does the patent last on the injector.
Just as soon as it expires, someone will have a cheaper on on the market.
Click to expand...
And in the mean time let some kids die?
 
prometeus said:
What is it with some pharma companies are they being taken over by douche bags?
Forbes Welcome
Click to expand...

Yeah. That pisses me off.

I only recently became allergic to wasps, and in the last couple years had to make sure I had an epi-pin with me

First year, I paid a 35.00 co-pay.

This year. 750.00.

Un ****ing believable.
 
Paperview said:
Yeah. That pisses me off.

I only recently became allergic to wasps, and in the last couple years had to make sure I had an epi-pin with me

First year, I paid a 35.00 co-pay.

This year. 750.00.

Un ****ing believable.
Click to expand...

It is rather disgusting how far the system has pushed to immoral profit over everything else. There needs to be a change with our healthcare and medicine structures. Living cannot be just for the rich.
 
Ikari said:
It is rather disgusting how far the system has pushed to immoral profit over everything else. There needs to be a change with our healthcare and medicine structures. Living cannot be just for the rich.
Click to expand...

Socialists like you just hate capitalism
 
shagg said:
Socialists like you just hate capitalism
Click to expand...

It's not a fair market. The healthcare companies can leverage someone's need of a certain medication in order to make them pay more. It's disgusting, and it should be regulated.
 
Your Star said:
It's not a fair market. The healthcare companies can leverage someone's need of a certain medication in order to make them pay more. It's disgusting, and it should be regulated.
Click to expand...

Exactly. It's not open competition, it's not free market. It's a captured audience, people have to buy it if they want to live. If there were many companies putting out these devices, the price would fall to market values. But since it's limited and restricted, they can charge whatever they want and if you want to live then you pay their price.

Things have gotten far out of hand with the evaluation of our medicine and healthcare costs. Most of this is supported through government law to protect the big donors to the Republocrats, but it all works against the general welfare of the People. There is no reason that living should be restricted to the rich.
 
shagg said:
Socialists like you just hate capitalism
Click to expand...

Considering the united condemnation from elected Republicans and Democrats alike with regard to Shkreli's behavior, I thankfully do not ascribe what I am about to say to them. I am reserving this comment for you alone.

When something as simple as an emergency intervention from an allergic reaction means we have to choose between socialism or capitalism, something is seriously wrong.
 
Your Star said:
It's not a fair market. The healthcare companies can leverage someone's need of a certain medication in order to make them pay more. It's disgusting, and it should be regulated.
Click to expand...

I, like many, am nervous for the well-being of people we know and don't know. With each additional sting from a bee or wasp, I significantly worry about my mother's life. It just gets worse and worse for her. She shouldn't feel the strain from wanton greed when the price several years ago for this miraculous device was just fine. Thankfully she can afford to prioritize her spending in such a way to afford her next epipen. Many others are not so fortunate.
 
Fiddytree said:
Considering the united condemnation from elected Republicans and Democrats alike with regard to Shkreli's behavior, I thankfully do not ascribe what I am about to say to them. I am reserving this comment for you alone.

When something as simple as an emergency intervention from an allergic reaction means we have to choose between socialism or capitalism, something is seriously wrong.
Click to expand...

I would change that to "predatory capitalism".
 
Risky Thicket said:
I would change that to "predatory capitalism".
Click to expand...

Perhaps so. Regardless, something so basic shouldn't hinge on Americans making such a grand economic value judgement. What sort of an argument is it from capitalists that," if you want affordable bread, choose socialism"? You wouldn't hear most capitalists saying such nonsense. Instead, you'd hear arguments about which economic system is able to best produce affordable bread.
 
Last edited:
prometeus said:
And in the mean time let some kids die?
Click to expand...
I am not saying it is right, but it likely is legal.
Some smart person may find a way around the delivery patent, and sell the result cheaper.
 
longview said:
I am not saying it is right, but it likely is legal.
Some smart person may find a way around the delivery patent, and sell the result cheaper.
Click to expand...
"Cheaper" meaning $400, whereas not so long ago and with no changes to the device itself, it was closer to $100?

It's not like someone else can just knock off their own version and have it out the door in 3 months. It has to be tested, it has to meet FDA approval, it can't tread on existing patents.

This is not capitalism. It's an abuse of monopoly power.
 
Visbek said:
"Cheaper" meaning $400, whereas not so long ago and with no changes to the device itself, it was closer to $100?

It's not like someone else can just knock off their own version and have it out the door in 3 months. It has to be tested, it has to meet FDA approval, it can't tread on existing patents.

This is not capitalism. It's an abuse of monopoly power.
Click to expand...

It is capitalism and its exactly how the country was designed.

The Congress shall have Power To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;
Click to expand...

Without the ability to make lots of money off the epipen, it likely would not exist in the first place.
 
Fiddytree said:
Considering the united condemnation from elected Republicans and Democrats alike with regard to Shkreli's behavior, I thankfully do not ascribe what I am about to say to them. I am reserving this comment for you alone.

When something as simple as an emergency intervention from an allergic reaction means we have to choose between socialism or capitalism, something is seriously wrong.
Click to expand...

I dont agree. Would you rather live in a socialist system where you can get cheap emergency meds, but are a slave to the state? Or would you rather be free with all the insecurity that freedom brings?
 
EpiPen Price Rise

jonny5 said:
I dont agree. Would you rather live in a socialist system where you can get cheap emergency meds, but are a slave to the state? Or would you rather be free with all the insecurity that freedom brings?
Click to expand...

If basic emergency medical care can be easily and affordably provided by a single payer system, but it cannot affordably be done through a capitalist system, then the capitalist system would have a hard time justifying its presence.

I don't hamstring myself with completely intangible political metaphysics if they don't mean anything in the real world.
 
Paperview said:
Yeah. That pisses me off.

I only recently became allergic to wasps, and in the last couple years had to make sure I had an epi-pin with me

First year, I paid a 35.00 co-pay.

This year. 750.00.

Un ****ing believable.
Click to expand...

Thanks, Obama
 
Visbek said:
"Cheaper" meaning $400, whereas not so long ago and with no changes to the device itself, it was closer to $100?

It's not like someone else can just knock off their own version and have it out the door in 3 months. It has to be tested, it has to meet FDA approval, it can't tread on existing patents.

This is not capitalism. It's an abuse of monopoly power.
Click to expand...
There is a reasonable chance someone else already has a pen injector, like.
https://www.victozapro.com/prescrib...ction&utm_campaign=Insulin Delivery&TID=15854
that could be adapted.
 
Fiddytree said:
If basic emergency medical care can be easily and affordably provided by a single payer system, but it cannot affordably be done through a capitalist system, then the capitalist system would have a hard time justifying its presence.

I don't hamstring myself with completely intangible political metaphysics if they don't mean anything in the real world.
Click to expand...

They mean everything. A single payer system removes freedom of choice. You can either be forced into a system or you can have a choice. The US is about the latter, that we all have a right to be free, and the purpose of govt is to protect that right. Not to force people to provide you with things you want or need, or to supply them for you. Other than the limited instances we all agreed on, like protection from invasion, or mail service.
 
longview said:
There is a reasonable chance someone else already has a pen injector, like.
https://www.victozapro.com/prescrib...ction&utm_campaign=Insulin Delivery&TID=15854
that could be adapted.
Click to expand...
Yes... and Novo Nordisk would still have to pour R&D resources into development, testing and approvals. They might even want or need to develop their own generic epinephrine, which again takes time and R&D.

To what end, exactly? To slightly undercut Mylan on price? In order to make it worth their while, they will still need to charge more than the original price, which apparently went up 400% or more for no reason whatsoever. It will also divert resources from Novo Nordisk's own R&D efforts, which include fighting diabetes and hormone replacement. That's not an efficient use of resources for anyone.

Again, the problem here is that medicine is not a normal market. This is not like walking into a supermarket, where you can freely choose between the red delicious Granny Smith and organic Pink Lady apples. Patients are essentially captive, and insurance obscures the costs, until it blows up to the point where insurers need to increase the deductibles.

This is not a case of a minor misalignment of the market. It's a market failure that is a direct result of treating pharmaceuticals like a commodity.
 
Ikari said:
I'm not a socialist. Do you wish to lie about anything else then?
Click to expand...

Your Star said:
It's not a fair market. The healthcare companies can leverage someone's need of a certain medication in order to make them pay more. It's disgusting, and it should be regulated.
Click to expand...

Fiddytree said:
Considering the united condemnation from elected Republicans and Democrats alike with regard to Shkreli's behavior, I thankfully do not ascribe what I am about to say to them. I am reserving this comment for you alone.

When something as simple as an emergency intervention from an allergic reaction means we have to choose between socialism or capitalism, something is seriously wrong.
Click to expand...

OK, clearly I should have included a sarcasm alert. I suppose this is Poe's law in a nutshell. For the record I agree with you guys.

Much like with the price hike on the AIDS drug, this is chasing profits with total disregard to what happens to actual people in the process.
 
Visbek said:
Yes... and Novo Nordisk would still have to pour R&D resources into development, testing and approvals. They might even want or need to develop their own generic epinephrine, which again takes time and R&D.

To what end, exactly? To slightly undercut Mylan on price? In order to make it worth their while, they will still need to charge more than the original price, which apparently went up 400% or more for no reason whatsoever. It will also divert resources from Novo Nordisk's own R&D efforts, which include fighting diabetes and hormone replacement. That's not an efficient use of resources for anyone.

Again, the problem here is that medicine is not a normal market. This is not like walking into a supermarket, where you can freely choose between the red delicious Granny Smith and organic Pink Lady apples. Patients are essentially captive, and insurance obscures the costs, until it blows up to the point where insurers need to increase the deductibles.

This is not a case of a minor misalignment of the market. It's a market failure that is a direct result of treating pharmaceuticals like a commodity.
Click to expand...
I realize it is complicated, but price fixing may have it's own complications,
for all we know the price hike is a result of other price fixing in the market.
I do not buy the press release story about the insurance deductibles changing as their reason for the increase,
more likely they realized they had a captive market.
 
jonny5 said:
They mean everything. A single payer system removes freedom of choice. You can either be forced into a system or you can have a choice. The US is about the latter, that we all have a right to be free, and the purpose of govt is to protect that right. Not to force people to provide you with things you want or need, or to supply them for you. Other than the limited instances we all agreed on, like protection from invasion, or mail service.
Click to expand...

Look mate. The duty of our systems is to serve the populace to the best of its abilities and for the populace to feel that they are being satisfactorily serviced. If their confidence in the capitalist system or a particular private service sector tanks, it is likely for very good reason.

I believe that more often than not, the private sector is perhaps best suited to delivery bang for buck. But occasionally we see otherwise, it we start seeing degradation. I owe no particular sacrosanct oath with capitalism or democratic socialism, and neither does most of the public.

And just to let you know, in my locality, I am with a growing cadre of advocates that are wanting to break up government monopolies in the delivery of human service healthcare. In my area, the state runs almost everything (and I do mean almost everything, including grievances and oversight), but does so incredibly poorly. Oddly enough, in my state it is the conservative Republicans advocating for state-run programming and are the reason why it sucks so badly. Meanwhile the Democrats are wanting reform of existing state-run programming and also want to break the monopoly in favor of allowing greater private services.

I owe no particular allegiance on the question. My only suggestion is that you have to convince everyone else that the private sector is better and doing its job properly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom