Case 5 drug dilemmas

docx

School

Volunteer State Community College *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

1020

Subject

Medicine

Date

Oct 30, 2023

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by BrigadierBoulder9255

Case 5.2, "Drug Dilemmas 1. What explains the high price of prescription medicines in the United States? What if anything should be done about it? Do you believe that in the United States drug prices reflect the operation of a fair and competitive marked? The high cost of prescription medication in the United States is largely due to the marketing techniques of pharmaceutical companies, which advertise their medication and promote their ability to treat illnesses. People with severe illnesses may consider enrolling in a clinical trial or trying a new drug if it offers a possibility of treating them. However, consumers believe that the high cost of medication is due to drug research and development. Patients should have access to all information about a drug or study. Advertising campaigns should focus on the reality of the illness and the effects of the drug. The drug prices in the United States do not reflect a fair and competitive market. Companies should not be allowed to recruit clinical patients to participate in tests outside the country. If a drug's marketing is targeted in the US, citizens should be allowed access to the clinical trial. 2. Given the nature of their product, do pharmaceutical companies have ethical responsibilities that other corporations don't have? In your view, are the large U.S. drug companies good corporate citizens? Pharmaceutical companies have a unique ethical responsibility due to the nature of their products. Unlike other companies, pharmaceuticals are made to treat illnesses and are meant to be consumed. Therefore, the code of ethics for pharmaceutical companies should be different from that of retail or service-providing companies. Pharmaceutical companies must prioritize the needs of their consumers and

adhere to a specific code of ethics. Unfortunately, many large U.S. drug companies do not act as good corporate citizens. Being a good corporate citizen means providing equal opportunities for all, yet these pharmaceutical companies choose to market their products in places where they will be most profitable. 5. Do drug companies have an obligation to make new drugs available to patients who were involved in their development, either here or overseas? Does the size of the company make a difference? What would you do if you were Dr. Lange? What obligations, ideals and consequences should he take into account? In my opinion, pharmaceutical companies are not obligated to provide new drugs to test patients if it requires patience to fill out proper documentation. While these companies aim to help people, they are still in business to generate profits. Although it may seem unfair to stop medication supply to patients who helped evaluate them, it is not necessarily unethical. Businesses, whether related to health or retail, still need to make money. If pharmaceutical companies are required to provide free drugs to evaluate patients, they would barely make any profit. However, larger companies that generate substantial profit should be obligated to provide medication for test patients. Dr. Lange should consider his business's ethics and morals before making any decision. What does he want his pharmaceutical company to represent? 6. Is it ethical for companies to decline to sell a useful drug like Ranolazine in a poor country because they can make more money marketing it elsewhere? It is considered highly unethical for pharmaceutical companies to refuse to sell a beneficial drug like ranolazine to a less developed country simply because they can earn more profit by selling it elsewhere. As per the code of ethics, honesty, fairness, leadership, integrity, compassion, respect,

responsibility, transparency, and environmental concern must be maintained by businesses. It is wrong for a pharmaceutical company whose primary purpose is to provide medicines to people, to withhold a drug that can potentially save lives. Even if the company can make more money by selling the drug elsewhere, they should educate everyone about the benefits of their medication. The primary goal of pharmaceutical companies should be to help consumers, not to maximize profits. 7. When it comes to life-saving drugs, do pharmaceutical companies have a moral obligation to make them available in poor countries at little or no cost? Explain why or why not. What about effective but non-life-saving drugs like Ranolazine? Large pharmaceutical companies have a moral obligation to make life-saving drugs available at little to no cost in poor countries. These companies often make hefty profits by charging double the cost they pay to manufacture medications. Many of these companies can reduce their product costs by half and still make substantial profits. Therefore, they should use their revenue to help poor countries by offering life-saving drugs free of charge. Additionally, if a pharmaceutical company is using a country for testing, then they should be morally obligated to continue helping the people who participated in testing patients. Although these companies still need to make profits, if they are big enough, they should be required to give back to their test subjects. However, smaller pharmaceutical companies that do not make as much profit should not be held accountable for providing further medications.

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version