Looks like drug prices might go up.

[GlassOnion]

Drug Shortages: A Deadly Problem With No Cure in Sight - DailyFinance

Drug companies not producing key/useful drugs because they're 'not profitable'. So it's either them cutting down on production of that line because it will effect the shareholders, or they are trying to teach the medical field a lesson by going "see, you need this stuff, so pony up more."

Either way, my guess is drug prices are going to increase for some things (if not all things once they get us customized to paying higher prices), because they'll demand higher prices to start production again, unless they're subsidized, in which case we'll still pay more, just to a different body.

But it's an interesting situation because, to my knowledge, it's not just the US, but Europe and Canada as well, and not just one company. So it's either collusion or just a new trend.

Edit: I guess it should be added (though you'd know it from reading the article) that it's not JUST that they're not profitable, but also because it's hard to get hold of some of the raw ingredients, but the bottom line is profit any how so it's all the same street in the end.

 

[Buckshot]

Sounds like another perfect bail out situation in the making. I have no problem with them making a profit, why else would they be in business? Or they could get everyone who thinks businesses should be in existence for the good of the people, to work free of charge, that would reduce operating costs a lot.

 

[GlassOnion]

I have no problem with them making a profit, why else would they be in business?

Right, which only leaves a price increase to make it profitable enough to justify them making it, or the government to step in. Either they'll have to open up their own facilities to produce the drug (which won't work with patents and what not) or they'll have to subsidize the costs.

Either way, we lose.

 

[oakash]

Isn't this a good thing?

I am an idiot when it comes to government and business, but it should be good if people aren't able to get drugs...right?

Unless they are severely addicted, then it wouldn't be very good.

 

[blue]

Isnt ObamaCare going to subsidize pharmaceuticals? If the .GOV is going to pay for it why wouldnt Big Pharm do whatever they can to drive up the prices.

 

[GlassOnion]

I am an idiot when it comes to government and business, but it should be good if people aren't able to get drugs...right?

Drugs as in medicine.

 

[oakash]

Drugs as in medicine.

Oooooo. Alright. Now I feel dumb. Anyways, continue on..

 

[elegy]

yeah, we've been having all kinds of trouble at work getting the meds we need- everything from anesthesia drugs to chemo drugs to simple triple antibiotic eye ointment. and then when we can get them, often the prices are way higher than they used to be.

 

[GlassOnion]

In vet med world it's metrodinazole that seems to be the hardest to get now a days.

This is just like what Ateva did with Propofol last June. Popular anesthesia med but they just yanked it (with no heads up to the consumers) because it wasn't profitable enough. Left lots of people high and dry on that one.

 

[release the hounds]

So I guess the big question everyone should be asking themselves is

" are these drugs prescribed to me because I need them and they are the best for me?" or "are they prescribed to you because they are the most profitable?"

 

[MPP]

One area of science fiction posits a world in which huge corporations, not nations, run the world. I think we may already be there.

 

[GlassOnion]

One area of science fiction posits a world in which huge corporations, not nations, run the world. I think we may already be there.

I'm reading Snow Crash right now which is based on that idea.

I don't think we're there yet, but we're on our way.

 

[Bailey08]

In vet med world it's metrodinazole that seems to be the hardest to get now a days.

That's interesting. Bailey was on it for a while (thankfully we can now manage his IBD w/o) and it was super cheap.

So I guess the big question everyone should be asking themselves is

" are these drugs prescribed to me because I need them and they are the best for me?" or "are they prescribed to you because they are the most profitable?"

Shouldn't we be wondering that anyway? With all of the drug marketing and direct salespersonship?

On a slightly related topic, from what I understand, Big Pharma is already marketing the same old stuff under a different name in order to get a new exclusive patent when something has gone generic. And on a similar related tangent, Walgreens called my doctor once to tell her that I wanted a name brand drug when she'd given me a prescription for a generic. Fortunately she responded that the generic was just fine (and gave me a call to explain -- I was a little confused as of course I'd never requested the name brand).

 

[corgipower]

In vet med world it's metrodinazole that seems to be the hardest to get now a days.

Does that apply to the one for fish as well?

 

[GlassOnion]

That's interesting. Bailey was on it for a while (thankfully we can now manage his IBD w/o) and it was super cheap.

That may be the problem though. It was too cheap, not enough profit margin for the producer, so they stopped making it.

Does that apply to the one for fish as well?

I had no idea it was made for fish. I'd assume so though?

How do you even administer that? Add it to the water?


Edit: Actually I misread something. The article I was reading was talking about a 700% increase in metronidazole's price in a short period of time, due to the low profitability of it. Then I read an article over Doxorubicin, which is in shortage (along with propofol). I evidently confused Doxo for metro.

Then I came across that article I posted originally. So no, I don't think you have to worry about a shortage of metronidazole, but you may be paying a much higher price in the future.

Edit2: Yah I was definitely mistaken. Basically it was more of a glut than a shortage. What happened was when metro went generic, lots of firms rushed to the new generic, profitable drug and that drove the price way down, which is why you could get it so cheaply. Then people started dropping out of the business (since it was no longer profitable), and the last two companies producing it decided to jack up the price. The amount varies between 200 - 700% dependent on source.

But it may just be a fluctuating thing. Eventually more firms will enter back into the market, once it becomes profitable again, and the price will go back down. It's just a question of where it'll stop this time (whether it'll go down to cheap again or stay a middle price).

Edit3: Well this just gets more and more interesting. Evidently the big chain pharmacies, like Wally world, are keeping their prices artificially low (or are getting much bigger breaks in pricing) so that they don't lose the sales. I wonder how long that will last for? On their website it's still about $10/90, but on vet sites it's more of $180/250, where as it used to be $30/250.

Big Pharma is already marketing the same old stuff under a different name in order to get a new exclusive patent when something has gone generic.

Naw, the old generic remains, just the pharmaceutical companies will tack on some meaningless bit of carbons that doesn't affect the over efficacy of the drug, then market that as something or other (because it's, technically, a new drug) or they'll couple the drug with a generic decongestant or something else so it's technically a new formula. It's up to the consumer to stick with the generics and not the new hyped up pretty label. You can't pin that as a problem on the producers. Caveat emptor.

And on a similar related tangent, Walgreens called my doctor once to tell her that I wanted a name brand drug when she'd given me a prescription for a generic. Fortunately she responded that the generic was just fine (and gave me a call to explain -- I was a little confused as of course I'd never requested the name brand).

There's absolutely NO reason to buy name brand drugs when a generic is available. The generics HAVE to be as efficient as the name brand is to be sold. Any differences as far as the consumer goes are placebo.

 

[corgipower]

There's absolutely NO reason to buy name brand drugs when a generic is available. The generics HAVE to be as efficient as the name brand is to be sold. Any differences as far as the consumer goes are placebo.

Not always. There can be some difference in quality which can make some brands more or less effective than others. Plus, if there are inactive ingredients those are often different, which can also affect things in terms of how each person responds to what's being put into their bodies. I've had some very real differences in results and side effects between brand name vs store brand of OTC meds.

How do you even administer that? Add it to the water?

Same as the dog version. It's a tablet. It's the exact same drug, just labeled differently.

Edit3: Well this just gets more and more interesting. Evidently the big chain pharmacies, like Wally world, are keeping their prices artificially low (or are getting much bigger breaks in pricing) so that they don't lose the sales. I wonder how long that will last for? On their website it's still about $10/90, but on vet sites it's more of $180/250, where as it used to be $30/250.

Online, metro 250mg is about $6/100. $11 for 500mg.

 

[Lilavati]

I have no problem with them making a profit, why else would they be in business? Or they could get everyone who thinks businesses should be in existence for the good of the people, to work free of charge, that would reduce operating costs a lot.

Buckshot, they have made profits with those drugs for years. Perfectly good ones. The problem is that they want to make obscene ones. Most of those old drugs cost almost nothing to make. They work just fine. They can be sold for a tidy profit. But the same resources can be used to make some really expensive drug instead, that may not treat the same thing, or may treat the same thing, but no better, or even not as well. But the shareholders want more money and the executives want higher salaries. So, out with the old, in with the new! Up with the prices!

Look, I understand the free market idea, and I also understand that its their equipment. And, part of the problem is that regulation makes it hard for someone else to step in and just start making the old drugs in their own facility (i.e. answering market need). Of course, there's also the problem that the drug companies have merged so many times that there aren't many left . . .

However, and this is where we will differ, there is also such a thing as greed. Plain, cold-blooded, immoral, greed. Greed that says that the profit we make from making a cheap effective drug everyone can afford is not enough, and we need to make an expensive new drug instead so we can make really BIG profits. (There's an immense amount of evidence that the drug companies focus on developing "blockbuster" drugs and "me too" drugs that we don't really need, while totally ignoring drugs we don't) MEanwhile, we'll take the old drug off the market, and push the new drug on doctors, telling them its the new wonder drug, when, um, actually, it isn't. Insurance will pay for it (rates will go up), the government will pay for it for medicare and medicaid (ripping off the taxpayer), and then people who don't have insurance (or lost theirs because they can't afford it anymore) can't buy the cheap drug, and can't afford the new one, but screw them, because we are making lots of MONEY!!

I think the corporate model is the best way to make money and create value that the world has ever seen. I think the free market is, if nothing else, the best system we've seen yet. However, I also believe in market failure, and I believe that corporations will do whatever makes them the most money, which is fine, until ordinary people get caught in the crossfire. When people are denied cheap, effective, proven medication because a company can make more money selling new, expensive medication that may or may not work as well, and thus their lives and health are effected, then society shouldn't just shrug it off.

Now, as to what the government should do . . . actually my first thought is to loosen regulations to allow a bunch of small companies to enter drug manufacuring for generics. My next thought is to loosen import regulations (though with strict quality controls). My next thought is to trust-bust the drug companies. Then come the bailouts and subsidies.

 

[GlassOnion]

Online, metro 250mg is about $6/100. $11 for 500mg.

From which supplier? I was looking at Butler's and Webster's cost earlier.

 

[corgipower]

From which supplier? I was looking at Butler's and Webster's cost earlier.

KV Vet

 

[GlassOnion]

Yah but they're out of stock (might be due to vets grabbing it wherever they can where it's cheap. A lot of them are just thinking of buying from CostCo/Wally world until prices through their suppliers return to normal).

I wonder if their price will go up when they get more? I guess we'll know in a few days.