The First Anti-Drug Price Gouging Law Essay

Lobbyist interference from multi-million dollar pharmaceutical companies has heavily influenced Washington lawmakers’ policymaking. These pharmaceutical companies have their hand in much of the United States lawmaking practice. These powerful corporations stand to make a lot of money from the sale of drug testing supplies and services to the U.S. government. Macdonald reports:

Imagine this: you are tragically diagnosed with a chronic life-threatening illness. Your only hope to survive is through medication to treat your disorder. The medicine is pricy but you can work out the costs each month. One day, you go to fill your prescriptions and realize the cost of a $13 pill has jumped to an astounding $750. You need this patented medication to survive and to afford it you end up losing your home, filing for bankruptcy, and sleeping in your car. This story sounds fictional but it is the reality for many Americans who can no longer afford their grossly overpriced medications.

The rise in drug prices is causing the public to ask why this is so and why there isn’t anything being done, or what the reason could be for sky high prices. Some of the reasons include pharmaceutical companies setting their drug prices

The prices of prescription drugs in the United States are by far the highest in the world. [1] On average, Europeans pay 40% less than Americans for the same medications. [2] Consumers have been resorting to several ways, sometimes putting themselves in harm’s way, to alleviate the burden of high prescription drug costs. Some buy their medications online or cross the borders to neighboring countries so they would be able to afford buying their needed medications. Others have resorted to the illegal act of selling their unused medications in online forums just to recover part of their expenses. Many factors contribute to the increased drug prices in the United States including research and

"In the past two decades or so, health care has been commercialized as never before, and professionalism in medicine seems to be giving way to entrepreneurialism," commented Arnold S. Relman, professor of medicine and social medicine at Harvard Medical School (Wekesser 66). This statement may have a great deal of bearing on reality. The tangled knot of insurers, physicians, drug companies, and hospitals that we call our health system are not as unselfish and focused on the patients' needs as people would like to think. Pharmaceutical companies are particularly ruthless, many of them spending millions of dollars per year to convince doctors to prescribe their drugs and to convince consumers that their specific brand of drug is needed in

In 2015, the pharmaceutical industry spent over 27 billion dollars on advertising. The two greatest components of this effort were promotional advertising and free medication sampling, which the pharmaceuticals invested 15.5 and 5.7 billion dollars respectively (“Persuading the Prescribers”). Promotional advertising involves direct contact with health professionals, the most common being extravagant lunch conferences held for physicians and their staff. On the other hand, sampling involves distributing free sample of medications to physicians, who then have a choice of providing these samples to patients. As a result of these methods, the industry has seen revenue around $400 billion with 90% of physicians having a relationship with a drug company (Campbell 2007). Moreover, the prices of prescriptions continue to rise; a copay of a generic drug is $11.72, preferred brand drug is $36.37 and a specialty drug is $58.37 (Coleman and Geneson 2014). Although the profits are immense in the numbers demonstrated above, it is no surprise when pharmaceutical drug companies elevate their prices even more. For instance, recently Turing Pharmaceuticals raised the price of their medication Daraprim from $13.50 to $750. Keep in mind, this medication is used for threatening parasitic infections, aids, and cancer with alternative options currently found to be inefficient (Pollack 2015). Another example of this practice involves cycloserine, a drug used to

Improvements in health care and life sciences are an important source of gains in health and longevity globally. The development of innovative pharmaceutical products plays a critical role in ensuring these continued gains. To encourage the continued development of new drugs, economic incentives are essential. These incentives are principally provided through direct and indirect government funding, intellectual property laws, and other policies that favor innovation. Without such incentives, private corporations, which bring to market the vast majority of new drugs, would be less able to assume the risks and costs necessary to continue their research and development (R&D). In the United States, government action has focused on creating the environment that would best encourage further innovation and yield a constant flow of new and innovative medicines to the market. The goal has been to ensure that consumers would benefit both from technological breakthroughs and the competition that further innovation generates. The United States also relies on a strong generic pharmaceutical industry to create added competitive pressure to lower drug prices. Recent action by the Administration and Congress has accelerated the flow of generic medicines to the market for precisely that reason. By contrast, in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and

We in America tend to take medications for almost any problem we have, from headaches to gastrointestinal pain, to more serious chronic disorders such as depression and attention deficit disorder. While many of the uses of such medications may be necessary and legitimate, many are not, and due to this fact, many people become dependent on medications, mentally, and or physically. This problem is not simply the fault of the individual; in fact, the blame can also be placed upon the medical community, and the pharmaceutical companies who produce the drugs. How often can one turn on the television to see advertisements for Claritin, Aspirin, Pepto-Bismol, or even Zoloft or Ritalin? The pharmaceutical industry is motivated by monetary

Prescription drug prices are on the rise in the United States. Currently, the United States does not implement a price control on prescription drugs. Every day the supply and demand for prescription drugs fluctuates. Pharmaceutical companies produce drugs that are necessary for survival. Therefore, it is necessary for research and development to continue in the United States. Those suffering the effects of exorbitant prices must do so until a generic form of a prescription drug is produced. Once approved by the FDA, new drugs will make their appearance on the market and patients will no longer suffer financially. Until then, it is necessary for pharmaceutical companies to price their drugs based on the idea of supply and demand. This produces the profit used to fund research. Price controls discourage innovation. If a price control were set in place, of course the price of prescription drugs would decrease. However, the development of new drugs decreases with it. Today’s generation would benefit from lower prices, while future generations would suffer from the loss of drug innovation.

Haley Sweetland Edwards, graduate of Yale and Columbia Universities and a columnist at Time, in her article, When The Price Of The Blood-Pressure Drug Nitropress Leaped From $215 To $881 Last Year, An Increase Of 310%, It Triggered Public Outrage: What's Behind The Gouging?, published in Time magazine addresses the massive spike in prescription drug costs in the spring of 2016, and connotes that there is little the public can do about the drug prices. She supports this claim by stating, “Valeant [the drug company] has boosted the price [of the drug] by nearly 3,200%, leaving those who rely on the medication to survive with very little choice” (Edwards), and by quoting “‘They cannot say no," says Pearson. "They're in a position where they have

In the business of drug production over the years, there have been astronomical gains in the technology of pharmaceutical drugs. More and more drugs are being made for diseases and viruses each day, and there are many more drugs still undergoing research and testing. These "miracle" drugs are expensive, however, and many Americans cannot afford these prices.

The Pharmaceutical industry has been in the spotlight for decades due to the fact that they have a reputation for being unethical in its marketing strategies. In The Washington Post Shannon Brownlee (2008) states, “We try never to forget that medicine is for the people. It is not for the profits. The profits follow.” This honorable statement is completely lost in today’s world of pharmaceutical marketing tactics. These tactics are often deceptive and biased. Big Pharma consistently forgets their moral purpose and focuses primarily on the almighty dollar. Big Pharma is working on restoring their reputation by reforming their ethical code of conduct.

Thank you for referencing this interesting article, Danh. Noncompliance is undeniably an important issue for pharmacists and can play a huge part in a patient’s health. However, I will not be reconsidering my position due to several reasons. My focus is on expanding access of medications to patients by creation of a centralized electronic system that would help patients get the most affordable and effective therapy. Additionally, the information from the study that is the focus of the article was collected in 1997-2002, perhaps a more up-to-date analysis would provide better insight for the both of us. There is a growing number of negative media coverage regarding the high cost of drugs relating to “Big Pharma making huge drug ripoffs” (Rosenburg,

“Primum non nocere” is one of the many promises in the Hippocratic Oath that doctors must take before practicing medicine. The phrase itself means “First, Do No Harm”, thus perfectly encapsulating what doctors should be; they should be paragons of health that serve the public need. However, this oath and the ability for medicine to be a market, rather than a humanitarian effort, in the United States come into severe conflict with one another, leaving those who are to be saved from harm greatly disadvantaged. Free market medicine in its nature causes great harm to the consumer and allows corruption to fester, which is abundantly apparent in expert opinions, statistics gathered in recent years, and factual data collected by organizations. Due to this, federal regulation on the price of prescription drugs and medicine should be put in place in order to

Medicare also contributes to worsen such situation by issuing reimbursements to doctors partly based on the cost of the care provided. To some extent, patients are more willing to trust the specific drug their doctors prescribed to them even if it costs more. Furthermore, in this case of Avastin and Lucentis, it seems that the company that invented both drugs is trying everything they can, from rebate to lobbying, to keep all the doctors from substituting with the cheaper alternative ones. (Whoriskey, 2013)