This would also help with so-called orphan diseases. Diseases that affect a relatively small percent of the population so there isn't enough money to be made by Big Pharma to develop drugs that could treat them. It makes it relatively easy for some asshole to corner the market and jack up prices to the extent there are drug treatments. Like that asshole from a few years back that looks like a rat, I forget his name.
Same with Big Pharma manufacturing medications that you have to take your whole life, when a cure could be possible, but they won't do that because lifelong customers mean $$$$ for them.
I hate our for-profit healthcare system so fucking much.
Stop putting restrictions on good ideas! Don't set rules for when this new office is allowed to manufacture medications. Just make 'em all, and force the corporations to price match or go out of business.
It is so frustrating how difficult (or impossible) it is to implement common sense policies in this country. Allowing the government to manufacture drugs would increase competition, decrease costs, and prevent shortages. It's a win-win-win.
It's a great idea, a no-brainer, so of course the Republicans oppose it.
The drug shortage I'm dealing with is for Trulicity, because of the ongoing Ozempic (a drug in the same class) debacle. I get one three-month supply refilled filled, then when it's time for the next, I often go at least a month before they can get it again. This time, since it's the holidays and *everyone* is apparently bingeing on appetite suppressants, it's been two months and is going on three.
"especially in the case of low-cost generic drugs that are challenging to make."
There it is, right there. If it's "low-cost" and "challenging to make" the pharma cos don't want to fuck with it. They don't make enough money on it for them to care. They would rather the gummint produce that shit for them.
It's not communism. It's - what do you call it when the government supports an industry by manufacturing things that the companies in the industry don't want to mess with because they don't get enough profit, but people need them anyway? Is there even a word for that?
Look, the government in one form or another covers a *lot* of the costs of drug development. Most pharmaceuticals are developed with heavy subsidization from the public purse. Only makes sense that either the public purse should receive a financial return on that investment, or that the resultant patents should be shared with the drug co's biggest backer.
I've been thinking a lot this week about Margaret Atwood's MaddAdam trilogy. Mostly because the biggest (?) villain is an evil preacher who interprets the Gospel as foundation for worshipping fossil fuels and in a world controlled by corporations, the pharmaceutical corporations have more power than anyone. Anyhow, I guess this is to say go ahead and kneecap the motherfuckers now, because I've seen how the movie ends otherwise and it's mostly bodies.
California has started (or is about to start) manufacturing insulin, at least as a start. It's A Good Thing but a big lift for most states and really should be paid for by the federal government.
This would also help with so-called orphan diseases. Diseases that affect a relatively small percent of the population so there isn't enough money to be made by Big Pharma to develop drugs that could treat them. It makes it relatively easy for some asshole to corner the market and jack up prices to the extent there are drug treatments. Like that asshole from a few years back that looks like a rat, I forget his name.
Same with Big Pharma manufacturing medications that you have to take your whole life, when a cure could be possible, but they won't do that because lifelong customers mean $$$$ for them.
I hate our for-profit healthcare system so fucking much.
Stop putting restrictions on good ideas! Don't set rules for when this new office is allowed to manufacture medications. Just make 'em all, and force the corporations to price match or go out of business.
It is so frustrating how difficult (or impossible) it is to implement common sense policies in this country. Allowing the government to manufacture drugs would increase competition, decrease costs, and prevent shortages. It's a win-win-win.
It's a great idea, a no-brainer, so of course the Republicans oppose it.
The drug shortage I'm dealing with is for Trulicity, because of the ongoing Ozempic (a drug in the same class) debacle. I get one three-month supply refilled filled, then when it's time for the next, I often go at least a month before they can get it again. This time, since it's the holidays and *everyone* is apparently bingeing on appetite suppressants, it's been two months and is going on three.
The punishment for Purdue for their oxycontin shenanigans should have been nationalization into a government run generic drug maker.
And yes dok, a lot of the shortages are stupid capitalism problems.
Yes. Spend tax dollars on this.
Merry SOSHULISMS!
End stage capitalism for US health care is approaching very quickly.
"Allowing the federal government to manufacture pharmaceuticals would distort the market and create unfair competition!"
"What competition? Those meds aren't being produced in sufficient quantities now."
"Impossible! The free market never fails. If meds don't get produced, it's because there's insufficient demand for them."
"Insufficient demand for insulin and anti-cancer drugs?"
"Uh....COMMUNIST!"
"March-in Rights" sounds good to this US tax payer!!
If Biden wasn't a COWARD he'd put Warren in charge of the fed.
"especially in the case of low-cost generic drugs that are challenging to make."
There it is, right there. If it's "low-cost" and "challenging to make" the pharma cos don't want to fuck with it. They don't make enough money on it for them to care. They would rather the gummint produce that shit for them.
It's not communism. It's - what do you call it when the government supports an industry by manufacturing things that the companies in the industry don't want to mess with because they don't get enough profit, but people need them anyway? Is there even a word for that?
"numerous as the number"!?!?!? Do they even have editors at NYT anymore?
meanwhile, pharma companies are making record profits.
Look, the government in one form or another covers a *lot* of the costs of drug development. Most pharmaceuticals are developed with heavy subsidization from the public purse. Only makes sense that either the public purse should receive a financial return on that investment, or that the resultant patents should be shared with the drug co's biggest backer.
That makes way too much sense for Republicans to support it.
I've been thinking a lot this week about Margaret Atwood's MaddAdam trilogy. Mostly because the biggest (?) villain is an evil preacher who interprets the Gospel as foundation for worshipping fossil fuels and in a world controlled by corporations, the pharmaceutical corporations have more power than anyone. Anyhow, I guess this is to say go ahead and kneecap the motherfuckers now, because I've seen how the movie ends otherwise and it's mostly bodies.
Good.
A national drug manufacturer is a great idea to keep the fucking private ones more honest.
I don't expect it will happen before I'm dead sometime in the next 30-40 years, but hey, still a good idea.
California has started (or is about to start) manufacturing insulin, at least as a start. It's A Good Thing but a big lift for most states and really should be paid for by the federal government.
It's kinda like the Federal Reserve Bank, but for drugs. I have a guy like that, too.