Experts fear shortage of unprofitable cancer drug.

[Collegeguy]

Whether to provide treatment to cancer patients is not an economic view. It is possible to provide the drugs while turning a reasonable profit. It is therefore realistic to expect it.

True, but losing things that are intangible is. Piracy is put on annual reports for good reason.

[Deleted]

Because many pharmaceutical companies make medicine for money, not to save people's lives. That's all there is, greed.

[Fugus]

I say any drug that is abandoned by the maker or paid for with public funding, the government should have the right to make them and sell them at or near cost to them who need it.

Some say they aren't in the business of making stuff. You are correct, they aren't (anymore) but that doesn't mean they can't make stuff and make it well and this would still force the companies to compete against the older product and attempt to beat it based on its merits and not just dump it for more profits.

And to the ones who say the government can't run a company right or allow a private company to run correctly. I present you with the US postal service. It has ran great for decades with great pay for its workers and cheap prices for its services. And it has ran great till 2006 when the republican party passed a bill in a successful attempt to sabotage them in an attempt to make them look bad by making sure they could not do many modernizations and forcing them to prepay the pensions and healthcare for their employees 75 years into the future (yes, they now have to save up for the retirement of workers who aren't even born yet) forcing them to set aside 5.5 billion a year. Baring the affects of that bill, it has been a shining example of a government regulated monopoly.

[Severance]

Yeah. This kind of crushes the argument of how awesome humans are for the inventions they make: the reason they make them.

Most people aren't creative because of money, and most discoveries are accidental...usually the unintended result of trying to make/do something else. True, many inventions end up turning into profit, but many don't. The curiosity and creativity of humans is admirable, but the morality fostered by the market system can generate all kinds of ill behaviors from otherwise well intended products and services.

Trying to extract as much profit as possible from the most vulnerable people of our society might make sense in terms of a company bottom line, but it's detestable from a moral standpoint. It's a shame more people don't follow Jonas Salk's example.

[Grizzly Willy]

HAH. Government manufacture something. That's pretty rich. Especially since private companies can produce it for less even AFTER you factor in their profits.

Because it has worked poorly in the past, it will always work poorly?

[ptwonline]

No one really expects (anymore) corporations to act as good corporate citizens and do things for the good of the people and sacrifice profit as a result. This is why you sometimes need government control or regulation: to make sure things get done for the public good even when they are not the most economically profitable thing to do.

[Laize]

No it isn't. Credit is a debt, when you use a credit card, you become indebted to that person with their confidence that you will pay them. That doesn't mean that you actually can or will pay them. If you actually have that money and use it to make the purchase, the person actually has that money, there's no risk that you won't be able to give it to them because you already did. Even without the risk you still aren't paying them at the time of the purchase, you are paying them later.

Opportunity cost, even when the opportunity is guaranteed, is not the same as real cost.

Uh huh. You go right on thinking that. I'll stick to the real world definition.

Opportunity cost is the cost of any activity measured in terms of the value of the next best alternative forgone (that is not chosen). It is the sacrifice related to the second best choice available to someone, or group, who has picked among several mutually exclusive choices.[1] The opportunity cost is also the "cost" (as a lost benefit) of the forgone products after making a choice. Opportunity cost is a key concept in economics, and has been described as expressing "the basic relationship between scarcity and choice".[2] The notion of opportunity cost plays a crucial part in ensuring that scarce resources are used efficiently.[3] Thus, opportunity costs are not restricted to monetary or financial costs: the real cost of output forgone, lost time, pleasure or any other benefit that provides utility should also be considered opportunity costs.

---------- Post added 2012-11-19 at 06:06 PM ----------

No one really expects (anymore) corporations to act as good corporate citizens and do things for the good of the people and sacrifice profit as a result. This is why you sometimes need government control or regulation: to make sure things get done for the public good even when they are not the most economically profitable thing to do.

No one ever expected corporations to act as benevolent entities. They've been out for themselves since the dawn of civilization and nothing has changed in that regard.

The desire to not alienate their customers (and customers' money) is what keeps the vast majority of corporations honest.

---------- Post added 2012-11-19 at 06:10 PM ----------

Because it has worked poorly in the past, it will always work poorly?

As someone who works with the markets daily, past performance is not necessarily an indicator of future returns.

But come on... governments fuck up when it comes to production almost as routinely as Old Faithful erupts. You'd have to be insanely optimistic or stupid to believe that will change anytime soon.

[Deadvolcanoes]

This happens in the United States too. I bookmarked this article earlier this year.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickunga...s-in-medicine/

I really dont know enough to have an educated opinion on this subject, but nationalizing medical research and development, at least to some extent, might not be such a terrible idea. I understand there are negatives, but there are absolutely positives also.

[ecthrund]

I regularly hear stories of patients, even pregnant women on the verge of delivery, being turned away from hospitals because they couldn't pay a few dollars as fees or bribe. It turn my stomach but it is our reality. Humans are capable of both untold good and evil. Corporate greed making life-saving drugs scarce doesn't surprise me.

Ultimately, it is up to the government regulators to take steps to address this. Incentives can be offered, but if the company is still not willing, then giving license to others to make generic versions of the drug is the only option. It should be use - corporates might be tied to profit, but the government's job is to make sure that the sick get their medicines one way or the other.

I am happy the Indian Supreme Court recently showed the door to Bayer regarding its obscenely priced cancer drugs. Profit is required, but it can't be the sole criterion. Patient welfare is even more important.

PS: The US govt is trying to arm twist India into revoking the generic license. Hmm...

[Kurgosh]

Actually I didn't blame the socialist system. I'm simply fairly sure they enact price controls on drugs and services.

It does confuse me as to why there's a shortage in the US or why they don't simply negotiate with the national health systems over there.

Things that are as in demand as this drug don't simply stop getting made unless the company doesn't have price control.

Just so we're clear - America's for profit system also enacts price controls. The major difference is that the price controls are in place to provide more money for CEOs and stockholders, rather than savings for taxpayers.

[Laize]

Just so we're clear - America's for profit system also enacts price controls. The major difference is that the price controls are in place to provide more money for CEOs and stockholders, rather than savings for taxpayers.

Uhhhh... no?

Yeah... going with no on this one.

Insurers negotiate with providers how much they're willing to pay for services rendered to their clients.

Hospitals negotiate with suppliers to determine a fair price for goods vs cost.

At no point are price controls enacted.

[Banzhe]

I'm fairly certain that european health care systems set price controls to control spending costs. To that end it seems plausible that they've ordered companies to only sell at a certain price which is no longer profitable.

I can see no other reason for demand outstripping supply and companies' solution to be to simply halt production

Speaking specifically for the Danish health care system there is a price stop (as in they can't charge w/e they feel like, it's production cost + tax etc and a certain amount for profit) on drugs classified as essential for some diseases, other high-end drugs are priced at the same as cheaper ones if they don't have a well documented benefit compared to other drugs on the marked, mainly to stop doctor's from prescribing the drug that would net them the biggest commision from some pharmaceutical companies without considering the patients best well being.

Other drugs again are "free", as in the Government pays X amount to ensure everyone will have access to specific types of medication, but most other drugs then have a tiny amount added in price to make up for any loss from the above.

[Masark]

But come on... governments fuck up when it comes to production almost as routinely as Old Faithful erupts. You'd have to be insanely optimistic or stupid to believe that will change anytime soon.

Right, because "essential drugs becoming unavailable" isn't corporations fucking up. It's the all-gloried market "working as designed".

I happen to work for a crown corporation that does production (of electricity) just fine and costs less than power averages in the USA, even after recent rate hikes to pay for expansion.

[Laize]

Right, because "essential drugs becoming unavailable" isn't corporations fucking up. It's the all-gloried market "working as designed".

I happen to work for a crown corporation that does production (of electricity) just fine and costs less than power averages in the USA, even after recent rate hikes to pay for expansion.

Electricity in the UK costs about 10p per kWh during the day.

NJ has one of the highest costs of living in the United States and our rates cap out around 8p per kWh. You move out to the midwest and you're looking at 3 or 4p.

So I'm sorry but... wut?

If the government offers companies a worthwhile amount to make this drug, it'll get made.

[Masark]

NJ has one of the highest costs of living in the United States and our rates cap out around 8p per kWh. You move out to the midwest and you're looking at 3 or 4p.

So I'm sorry but... wut?

Where are your numbers coming from? EIA's figures put the average residential rate in NJ at 16.23 cents/KWhr (10.2p). The cheapest power anywhere in the USA is 7.78 (4.89p) cents in Idaho. Granted, this is data for 2011, but I don't think your rate is likely to have dropped by 2 whole pence in the past year.

I pay 10.61 cents, which comes to 6.84p.

[Deleted]

I like how your attempt to demonize "evil European socialism" as killing people because it stands in the way of the all-benevolent all-good "free markets" has fallen back on the face of your own ideology

[Laize]

Where are your numbers coming from? EIA's figures put the average residential rate in NJ at 16.23 cents/KWhr (10.2p). The cheapest power anywhere in the USA is 7.78 (4.89p) cents in Idaho. Granted, this is data for 2011, but I don't think your rate is likely to have dropped by 2 whole pence in the past year.

I pay 10.61 cents, which comes to 6.84p.

Average rate in NJ is 16 cents? I don't know ANY provider that charges that (And I have checked them all since I could buy power from anywhere in state or even out of state in the Northeast) maybe if you go with a plan where you pay more during the day than at night... but never standard.

I personally pay around 8 cents + 2 transmission for a total of barely over 10.25. I live an hour outside of New York City.

[Masark]

Average rate in NJ is 16 cents? I don't know ANY provider that charges that (And I have checked them all since I could buy power from anywhere in state or even out of state in the Northeast) maybe if you go with a plan where you pay more during the day than at night... but never standard.

I personally pay around 8 cents + 2 transmission for a total of barely over 10.25. I live an hour outside of New York City.

Look for yourself. Table 4 is where my numbers are coming from, quoting residential rates.

http://www.eia.gov/electricity/sales_revenue_price/

[Dallan]

These shortages of medications are, unfortunately, something I have to see (and attempt to resolve) every day. To say it's frustrating would be a giant understatement at this point. The fluorouracil issue has been on going for the better part of probably the last year now and it's far from being alone in that respect. While there are alternatives for this particular drug, they're generally significantly more expensive.

The other part of the problem in these shortages is you have facilities that start to stock pile meds to ensure their patients do not go without. This, almost always, make the overall supply situation worse. I've always tried to have enough on hand to make it through the next 30 days based on average dosages for the patients in my facility but without going over board and being a greedy prick about hording it.

At the rate things are going with all of the drug shortages going around I literally could spend an entire 8 hour shift dealing with this shit. Quite frustrating. I've never seen shortages this bad in my 15 or so years in pharmacy.

[tombstoner139]

These shortages of medications are, unfortunately, something I have to see (and attempt to resolve) every day. To say it's frustrating would be a giant understatement at this point. The fluorouracil issue has been on going for the better part of probably the last year now and it's far from being alone in that respect. While there are alternatives for this particular drug, they're generally significantly more expensive.

The other part of the problem in these shortages is you have facilities that start to stock pile meds to ensure their patients do not go without. This, almost always, make the overall supply situation worse. I've always tried to have enough on hand to make it through the next 30 days based on average dosages for the patients in my facility but without going over board and being a greedy prick about hording it.

At the rate things are going with all of the drug shortages going around I literally could spend an entire 8 hour shift dealing with this shit. Quite frustrating. I've never seen shortages this bad in my 15 or so years in pharmacy.

What do you think is the solution?