After President Donald Trump conclusively demonstrated last week that he is unwilling to take on the pharmaceutical industry and has no "legitimate plan" to lower drug prices, a group of 21 American and Canadian doctors on Thursday unveiled an ambitious plan that—unlike Trump's "pharma-friendly" approach—would confront the drug industr
From the article:
“The proposed reforms include…repealing rules in the U.S. that ‘allow private firms to obtain exclusive licenses for drugs developed through publicly funded research.’”
It’s absurd—Big Pharma regularly spends far more on advertising than on research, but would have us believe that without extortionate pricing, research would grind to a halt.
With that said, what we really need is research into whether ANY of these drugs, at any price, are worth the risk. Drugs approved by FDA, prescribed by licensed physicians and dispensed by licensed pharmacies, now kill an estimated 100,000 USans each year, while non-invasive and non-toxic therapies are prosecuted as “quackery” by the medical establishment.
One of Jack Benny’s best jokes involved him being robbed at gunpoint …
Robber: “Your money or your life!”
(long, awkward pause)
Mugger: “Look bud. I said, your money or your life.”
Jack: "I’m thinking it over! "
… now …
Big Pharma/Big Medical: “Your money or your life.”
Us: “Please, help us.”
… yep … funny, funny stuff …
Death by Medicine
Medical marijuana needs to be part of this plan. There was a time–until two US Senators got involved (apologies for forgetting their names)–when drugs in the US were cheap because they were not patented after being developed in university labs with NHI funds. This was in the early 1970’s. Corporations often offered health insurance to their employees since the insurance was much less due to such lower drug prices. Pharmaceutical companies were simply manufacturing plants. Then university labs were first allowed patents on these drugs then allowed them, after receiving public funds to do the research, to sell these patents to these manufacturing plants which subsequently got exclusive rights to the drug for 20 years.
It is not Medicare For All but Expanded, Improved Medicare For All–no copays, no deductibles and it IS a Single Payer System! Oh, and it includes eye care and dental. Read H.R.676 when you get a chance.
Yes, I have done some organizing with them.
Strictly for Medicinal purposes…
Medicare as it stands is woefully inadequate unless you have Medicaid as a supplemental. Expanded, Improved Medicare For All will be the two joined into a single payer system. Oh, not that it matters, but I am not a Democrat but a socialist, something like a eco-Marxist.
Agreed and why the US PNHP and Canadians doctors are coming together to change that. Marijuana should be available to all who wish it. Medical Marijuana should be covered at no cost to the suffering user. That is what I meant.
In my home state for the moment, only medical MJ is legally available and no insurance will cover it.
Agreed. You teach a valuable lesson that it IS important the words we choose. So, here is to covering every man, woman and child in the US from cradle to grave without co-pays and deductibles.
This is a great effort and really has all the components required to get control of drug costs. I think we ought to separate this plan from medicare for all. We just treat the drug plans different from other medical requirements. If a doctor prescribes a drug the cost is covered by a national plan that still supports drug stores, drug companies etc. The goal should be reasonable drug costs, equal costs for every customer (not just the insurance companies), and a method to cover those who can not afford their drugs. This plan seems to come close to that.
I know of 2 people in our community that had their meds cut back significantly. The result - they felt much better. Some times all it takes is anothr doctor to say “why are you taking this”.
Pharmaceutical companies charge outrageous prices for live-sustaining drugs BECAUSE THEY CAN. There is nothing stopping them. Would we allow bakeries to charge $100 a loaf for bread? Hell, no!