SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
California considers selling its own generic prescription drugs:
California could become the first state to introduce its own brand of generic prescription drugs in an effort to drag down stratospheric healthcare costs. The plan for state-branded drugs is part of California Gov. Gavin Newsom's budget proposal, which he is expected to unveil Friday, January 10.
"A trip to the doctor's office, pharmacy or hospital shouldn't cost a month's pay," Newsom said in a statement. "The cost of healthcare is just too damn high, and California is fighting back." A plan for California to sell its own drugs would "take the power out of the hands of greedy pharmaceutical companies," Newsom said, according to the Associated Press.
Under the plan, the state would contract with one or more generic drug companies, which would manufacture select prescription drugs under a state-owned label, according to an overview of the plan reported by the Los Angeles Times. Those state generics would presumably be offered to Californians at a lower price than current generics, which could spark more competitive pricing in the market overall.
So far, much of the plan's details are unclear, though, including which drugs might be sold and how much money they could save residents and the state.
The conceptual plan so far has garnered both praise and skepticism from health industry experts.
Anthony Wright, executive director of the advocacy group Health Access California, told the Associated Press that "Consumers would directly benefit if California contracted on its own to manufacture much-needed generic medications like insulin—a drug that has been around for a century yet the price has gone up over tenfold in the last few decades."
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Wednesday January 15 2020, @02:02AM (7 children)
You are coming as an idiot on this one - once their patent expired (and nobody suggested California intends to break the patent protection), competition should guarantee low profits to be made in generics.
And yet:
1. Martin Shkreli [wikipedia.org]
2. an 10ml insulin dose costs between $2.28 and $6.16 to produce [businessinsider.com] (with the later being modified for absorption times), yet they are sold at prices that can get to $275 [businessinsider.com.au] in US. And this in spite of competition theoretically existing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Wednesday January 15 2020, @02:23AM (3 children)
To produce? Sure. To have the knowledge and means to produce in large quantities? Not even fucking close. Insulin is not a simple to produce substance.
Mostly it's evergreening though. Yeah, that drug you thought was ancient and long out of patent is a slightly altered version still under patent.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Wednesday January 15 2020, @03:05AM (2 children)
Do you know what "asset amortization costs" mean? It means costs to be deducted over time from the value of those "means of production in large quantities" that were incurred when those were bought/built. As such, they are included in the production cost; and with these already included, the value of an insulin dose doesn't get over $6.50.
Neither any mobile phone is a simple to produce gizmo - and yet...
So, what in the "costs between $2.28 and $6.16" fails your understanding?
Or are you implying the rest of $270 is required to cover the expenses of research for the "how to produce insulin with only $6 bucks"?
---
Buddy, trying to prove yourself right, you sound more idiotic with each new attempt.
Even more tragic as the position you defend is just the regurgitated "without pharma profits, the humanity will not discover new drugs" brain-wash that was fed to you and you accepted without even thinking.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 15 2020, @04:52PM
No but it might be required to pay the expenses of the 50 other drugs a manufacturer takes into the study process that never go anywhere.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday January 16 2020, @04:19PM
Check the methodology on the shit you cited. That is not in fact the case. It only covers imported materials cost and manufacturing cost.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Wednesday January 15 2020, @02:24AM (2 children)
Regardless, unless you want useful new drugs to cost tens of thousands of bucks per pill, quit bitching about spreading the cost across all the other drugs.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 15 2020, @08:38PM (1 child)
Can you stop being an idiot for maybe one week? It might be easier to not post, but being such a self-made success I'm sure you take pride in self improvement, even if it means taking a tough look at yourself. Right?
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday January 16 2020, @04:14PM
I'm sorry, was there a refutation in that troll somewhere? Let me double check... Nope, just insults because you got nuthin.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.