Page 2 of 9 FirstFirst
1
2
3
4
... LastLast
  1. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by Wells View Post
    From the article:

    They're still making money. They'd just make more money if they made something else.
    Whether that loss is actually producing the drug or in opportunity costs doesn't change the fact that they're losing money.

  2. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by Laize View Post
    Are you saying businesses should lose money on the production of this drug?
    I'm saying that if the company is already pulling in a reasonable degree of profit and they are faced with the decision of cutting out the health and well-being of patients in order to facilitate more profit, the choice to do so is wrong.

    I think our 10-year patent system for drugs is pretty good.

    For other stuff, though? Shit needs rebuilding.

    That's why that discussion is neither here nor there.
    I don't know about patents, but copyrights are absolutely silly. Their purpose is to encourage the creation of more contributions to the world, but they work against that by preventing people from building off of the works of others for an absurd amount of time.

    Quote Originally Posted by Laize View Post
    Whether that loss is actually producing the drug or in opportunity costs doesn't change the fact that they're losing money.
    There are many practices things that businesses could do or stop doing that would increase their profits. That doesn't mean that it's a good thing for them to do or stop doing them.

  3. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by Bergtau View Post
    I'm saying that if the company is already pulling in a reasonable degree of profit and they are faced with the decision of cutting out the health and well-being of patients in order to facilitate more profit, the choice to do so is wrong.
    Maybe from your moral standpoint, it might be.

    Businesses don't exist to lose money, though. They exist to make as much as they can.

  4. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by Laize View Post
    Whether that loss is actually producing the drug or in opportunity costs doesn't change the fact that they're losing money.
    No where in the article does it say they're losing money. They just say its not as profitable as other drugs.
    Quote Originally Posted by Nixx View Post
    Everyone is pro-US. They just don't know it yet.
    Quote Originally Posted by Fyre View Post
    Internet lives in the sky, don't need no cables for that.
    A nice list of logical fallacies. In picture form!

  5. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by Wells View Post
    No where in the article does it say they're losing money. They just say its not as profitable as other drugs.
    Don't you know what an opportunity cost is?

  6. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by Laize View Post
    Don't you know what an opportunity cost is?
    You said "Are you saying businesses should lose money on the production of this drug?"

    At this time there is no indication they're losing money, only that another product is more profitable. You're trying to shift posts here.
    Quote Originally Posted by Nixx View Post
    Everyone is pro-US. They just don't know it yet.
    Quote Originally Posted by Fyre View Post
    Internet lives in the sky, don't need no cables for that.
    A nice list of logical fallacies. In picture form!

  7. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by Laize View Post
    Maybe from your moral standpoint, it might be.

    Businesses don't exist to lose money, though. They exist to make as much as they can.
    This is actually not true. Businesses exist to provide for the wants and needs of people. The purpose of allowing them to turn profits is to give incentive for their creation.

  8. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by Laize View Post
    Yeah, a free market dictates that the remaining companies that DO produce the cancer drug can charge whatever makes it profitable. Not just profitable but as profitable as it needs to be.
    And the free market dictates that consumers won't buy or be able to afford as much of same products when prices are raised. Not to mention other companies still produce it at established prices. So it's smarter to simply produce something that is already being bought at much better profit margins.

    And anyway, the problem with drug shortages in general is quality and manufacturing problems. The shortage in the United States is also due to that.

    Quote Originally Posted by American Society of Health-System Pharmacists
    Reason for the Shortage

    APP stated fluorouracil was on allocation to prevent excessive purchases.1
    Teva stated their fluorouracil shortage was due to manufacturing delays.2
    Mylan Institutional states the reason for the shortage is that demand exceeds supply due to market conditions.3


    ---------- Post added 2012-11-19 at 07:56 AM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Laize View Post
    Don't you know what an opportunity cost is?
    Quote Originally Posted by nyc81991 View Post
    Getting rich at the expense of people who are suffering is a very sad thing. Money is a fake man made game, Life is what is real.
    /ten chars
    Last edited by semaphore; 2012-11-19 at 07:57 AM.

  9. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by Wells View Post
    You said "Are you saying businesses should lose money on the production of this drug?"

    At this time there is no indication they're losing money, only that another product is more profitable. You're trying to shift posts here.
    I'm doing no such thing. If you can't see that an opportunity cost of producing X drug at $4 profit instead of Y drug at $5 profit equates to a loss I'm not sure how else to explain it.

  10. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by Laize View Post
    I'm doing no such thing. If you can't see that an opportunity cost of producing X drug at $4 profit instead of Y drug at $5 profit equates to a loss I'm not sure how else to explain it.
    There's a difference between an opportunity cost and operating at a loss. They're still in the black. They're still making a profit. They could continue producing this drug and be profitable. They're not "losing money on the production of this drug".
    Quote Originally Posted by Nixx View Post
    Everyone is pro-US. They just don't know it yet.
    Quote Originally Posted by Fyre View Post
    Internet lives in the sky, don't need no cables for that.
    A nice list of logical fallacies. In picture form!

  11. #31
    Quote Originally Posted by semaphore View Post
    And the free market dictates that consumers won't buy or be able to afford as much of same products when prices are raised. Not to mention other companies still produce it at established prices. So it's smarter to simply produce something that is already being bought at much better profit margins.

    And anyway, the problem with drug shortages in general is quality and manufacturing problems. The shortage in the United States is also due to that.
    I did read that article. That might address shortages in America and simply be a coincidence. Says nothing of Europe.


    /ten chars
    Well, these companies have moral obligations to their shareholders as well. Why don't you ask the ESMA (EU version of the SEC) where the company's obligations truly lie?

    ---------- Post added 2012-11-19 at 08:12 AM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Wells View Post
    There's a difference between an opportunity cost and operating at a loss. They're still in the black. They're still making a profit. They could continue producing this drug and be profitable. They're not "losing money on the production of this drug".
    Yes they are. Every minute spent making X drug at $4 instead of Y drug at $5 costs them $1.

  12. #32
    Yes they are. Every minute spent making X drug at $4 instead of Y drug at $5 costs them $1.
    I'm really not going to try to argue with you if you want to claim that an opportunity cost is the same thing as operating at a loss.
    Quote Originally Posted by Nixx View Post
    Everyone is pro-US. They just don't know it yet.
    Quote Originally Posted by Fyre View Post
    Internet lives in the sky, don't need no cables for that.
    A nice list of logical fallacies. In picture form!

  13. #33
    Quote Originally Posted by Wells View Post
    I'm really not going to try to argue with you if you want to claim that an opportunity cost is the same thing as operating at a loss.
    I never once said they were operating at a loss. If you can point out where I did I'd be happy to admit I was wrong.

    I'm simply equating opportunity costs with losses. It's a valid comparison.

  14. #34
    Quote Originally Posted by Laize View Post
    I never once said they were operating at a loss. If you can point out where I did I'd be happy to admit I was wrong.
    Quote Originally Posted by Laize View Post
    Are you saying businesses should lose money on the production of this drug?
    Commence with the semantics and quibbling.
    Quote Originally Posted by Nixx View Post
    Everyone is pro-US. They just don't know it yet.
    Quote Originally Posted by Fyre View Post
    Internet lives in the sky, don't need no cables for that.
    A nice list of logical fallacies. In picture form!

  15. #35
    Quote Originally Posted by Wells View Post
    Commence with the semantics and quibbling.
    Yeah. I didn't say they were operating at a loss.

    An opportunity cost is the same thing as losing money.

  16. #36
    Quote Originally Posted by Laize View Post
    I never once said they were operating at a loss. If you can point out where I did I'd be happy to admit I was wrong.

    I'm simply equating opportunity costs with losses. It's a valid comparison.
    Opportunity cost isn't the same as losses, though. Losing something you never had isn't the same as losing something you actually had.

  17. #37
    Quote Originally Posted by nyc81991 View Post
    It's sad that people would rather make a huge profit than help people who are dieing. That tells you a lot about people right there.
    Yeah. This kind of crushes the argument of how awesome humans are for the inventions they make: the reason they make them.

  18. #38
    Quote Originally Posted by Laize View Post
    I did read that article. That might address shortages in America and simply be a coincidence. Says nothing of Europe.
    This is an industry that has chronic problems with shortages. There is a shortage in America and there is potentially going to be a shortage in Europe, according to your article. Calling it a "coincidence" in order to argue/insinuate that Europe's facing shortages only because of it's healthcare system is rather silly.


    Well, these companies have moral obligations to their shareholders as well.
    So? The point stands. Getting even richer at the expense of human life and suffering.

    ---------- Post added 2012-11-19 at 08:34 AM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Laize View Post
    An opportunity cost is the same thing as losing money.
    In the same way that a pirated song is a lost sale.
    Last edited by semaphore; 2012-11-19 at 08:34 AM.

  19. #39
    Quote Originally Posted by Laize View Post
    Apparently pharmaceutical manufacturers are slowing, even halting, production of fluorouracil; one of the most commonly prescribed drugs for the treatment of colorectal and breast cancer as well as being used in treatment of other cancers.

    http://www.thelocal.de/society/20121118-46239.html

    It seems that it's unprofitable to manufacture and sell the drug. I'm wondering why pharma companies don't simply raise the prices but I have a feeling it has something to do with health care systems in Europe. No clue why they won't simply sell in the US.
    Both your title and the articles title are misleading. The cancer drug is not unprofitable. "But many of Germany's top providers have stopped making the drug because it is not as profitable as other, more expensive ones."

    The drugs companies just know they can make far more money out of making other chemotherapy drugs and charge through the roof for them. Fluorouracil is profitable its just not as profitable as other drugs. That said if there is a demand for it some company will supply it even if it has to come from a different source than now (e.g. India).

  20. #40
    Elemental Lord Dezerte's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    8,051
    Corporate greed shows it's ugly rear once again...

    "because pharmaceutical companies say it is not financially worth their while to make it any more."

    This quote turns my stomach, I can't believe they actually think & reason like this.
    To declare that a personal, inner experience gives certainty about the workings of the universe is to assign far too much value to one’s subjective sense of conviction.
    I’m not that arrogant.

    The brain, marvelous instrument though it is, isn’t infallible. It can misfire, seize or hallucinate, and it can do so in a way that’s utterly indistinguishable from reality to the person experiencing it.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •