Gilead
Something I try to do every day is read the news before and after work. I've always found it relaxing, and it's good to keep up with what's going on in the world. The one story that really caught my eye and caused my blood pressure to instantly spike was http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/04/10/us-hepatitis-gilead-phrma-idUSBREA391I220140410 . Pretty much, a new drug that cures 90 percent of people infected with hepatitis. The price tag the company is selling the treatment for? $1,000 per pill, 84 pills per course of treatment over 12 weeks, which means $84,000 per patient. The price justification? 'Overall, patients will be spending less over their lifetimes treating this illness. So it will be a net gain for patients and insurance companies.' The logical behind that reasoning makes me sick. I suppose we should start slapping ridiculous price tags on vaccines too. Vaccines have been great at combating illness that can leave lifetime effects on sufferers. So, the price tag on them should be fairly cost prohibitive by that reasoning. Exploitation for profit, especially when it comes to a person's health makes me furious. I have always considered health and health care a basic human right, regardless of socioeconomic status, or ability to pay. I have never thought it was right to have a system that profits off of denying ill people treatment. Or having a tiered system that only provides the best service to the wealthy.
The American healthcare system and drug manufacturers have always struck me as inherently unjust. I will readily agree that it costs a lot of money for companies to research, test, and then manufacture new drugs, but that does not justify the price tags they tack on. Monetary profit should not outweigh the human cost and need. I have always personally believed that there should be a cap on profit. Maybe double the cost of the process in the first five years, and then have a set price (x times actual cost of manufactoring) after they hit that 2x cost. If they hit that profit mark before the five year mark then they lose their patent and generics can be made. I'm not really proposing that particular solution, all I know is that the astronomical cost and profits is a serious issue. Personally, I applaud India every time I see them deny patents to drugs whose costs are extremely prohibitive, and allowing other drug manufactures to create generics at a reasonable price. The large companies usually scream, but then they are first in line to run their clinical trials in the country because of it's lax requirements.
The American healthcare system and drug manufacturers have always struck me as inherently unjust. I will readily agree that it costs a lot of money for companies to research, test, and then manufacture new drugs, but that does not justify the price tags they tack on. Monetary profit should not outweigh the human cost and need. I have always personally believed that there should be a cap on profit. Maybe double the cost of the process in the first five years, and then have a set price (x times actual cost of manufactoring) after they hit that 2x cost. If they hit that profit mark before the five year mark then they lose their patent and generics can be made. I'm not really proposing that particular solution, all I know is that the astronomical cost and profits is a serious issue. Personally, I applaud India every time I see them deny patents to drugs whose costs are extremely prohibitive, and allowing other drug manufactures to create generics at a reasonable price. The large companies usually scream, but then they are first in line to run their clinical trials in the country because of it's lax requirements.