Part of the ObamaTapDance? - "Drug Makers Raise Prices in Face of Health Care Reform"
C.Tudor
Care Reform"
Is anyone surprised by this?
Email your elected officials and ask them how much money they've
accepted from the Pharmaceutical Industry during the last five years:
-- Anyone can make their opinion known:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/CONTACT/
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
http://www.house.gov/house/MemberWWW_by_State.shtml
--------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/16/business/16drugprices.html?th&emc=th
NY Times
November 16, 2009
Drug Makers Raise Prices in Face of Health Care Reform By DUFF WILSON
Even as drug makers promise to support Washington�s health care overhaul
by shaving $8 billion a year off the nation�s drug costs after the
legislation takes effect, the industry has been raising its prices at
the fastest rate in years.
In the last year, the industry has raised the wholesale prices of
brand-name prescription drugs by about 9 percent, according to industry
analysts. That will add more than $10 billion to the nation�s drug bill,
which is on track to exceed $300 billion this year. By at least one
analysis, it is the highest annual rate of inflation for drug prices
since 1992.
The drug trend is distinctly at odds with the direction of the Consumer
Price Index, which has fallen by 1.3 percent in the last year.
Drug makers say they have valid business reasons for the price
increases. Critics say the industry is trying to establish a higher
price base before Congress passes legislation that tries to curb drug
spending in coming years.
�When we have major legislation anticipated, we see a run-up in price
increases,� says Stephen W. Schondelmeyer, a professor of pharmaceutical
economics at the University of Minnesota. He has analyzed drug pricing
for AARP, the advocacy group for seniors that supports the House health
care legislation that the drug industry opposes.
A Harvard health economist, Joseph P. Newhouse, said he found a similar
pattern of unusual price increases after Congress added drug benefits to
Medicare a few years ago, giving tens of millions of older Americans
federally subsidized drug insurance. Just as the program was taking
effect in 2006, the drug industry raised prices by the widest margin in
a half-dozen years.
�They try to maximize their profits,� Mr. Newhouse said.
But drug companies say they are having to raise prices to maintain the
profits necessary to invest in research and development of new drugs as
the patents on many of their most popular drugs are set to expire over
the next few years.
�Price adjustments for our products have no connection to health care
reform,� said Ron Rogers, a spokesman for Merck, which raised its prices
about 8.9 percent in the last year, according to a stock analyst�s report.
This year�s increases mean the average annual cost for a brand-name
prescription drug that is taken daily would be more than $2,000 � $200
higher than last year, Professor Schondelmeyer said.
And this means that the cost of many popular drugs has risen even
faster. Merck, for example, now sells daily 10-milligram pills of
Singulair, the blockbuster asthma drug, at a wholesale price of $1,330 a
year � $147 more than last year. Singulair is now selling at retail, on
drugstore.com, for nearly $1,478 a year.
The drug companies �can charge what they want � it�s not fair,� Eric
White, the 42-year-old owner of a small jewelry store in Queens, said as
he left a pharmacy recently.
Despite having drug insurance, Mr. White says he now pays $110 a month
out of pocket for two brand-name allergy medicines, even as he has cut
prices in his jewelry store by at least 40 percent to keep customers
coming through the door.
He shook his head. �What can I do?� he said. �I need my medicines.�
The drug industry has actively opposed some of the cost-cutting
provisions in the House legislation, which passed Nov. 7 and aims to cut
drug spending by about $14 billion a year over a decade.
But the drug makers have been proudly citing the agreement they reached
with the White House and the Senate Finance Committee chairman to trim
$8 billion a year � $80 billion over 10 years � from the nation�s drug
bill by giving rebates to older Americans and the government. That
provision is likely to be part of the legislation that will reach the
Senate floor in coming weeks.
But this year�s price increases would effectively cancel out the savings
from at least the first year of the Senate Finance agreement. And some
critics say the surge in drug prices could change the dynamics of the
entire 10-year deal.
�It makes it much easier for the drug companies to pony up the $80
billion because they�ll be making more money,� said Steven D. Findlay,
senior health care analyst with the advocacy group Consumers Union.
Name-brand prices have risen even as prices of widely used generic drugs
have fallen by about 9 percent in the last year, Professor Schondelmeyer
said. But name brands account for 78 percent of total prescription drug
spending in this country. And as long as a name-brand drug still has
patent protection it faces no price competition from generics.
Ken Johnson, senior vice president of the industry association � the
Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America � criticized the
analysis Professor Schondelmeyer had conducted for AARP, saying it was
politically motivated.
�In AARP�s skewed view of the world, medicines are always looked at as a
cost and never seen as a savings � even though medicines often reduce
unnecessary hospitalization, help avoid costly medical procedures and
increase productivity through better prevention and management of
chronic diseases,� he said.
But Professor Schondelmeyer�s analysis � which found prices for the
name-brand drugs most widely used by the Medicare population rising by
9.3 percent in the last year, the fastest rate since 1992 � is in line
with the findings of a leading Wall Street analyst, too.
Catherine J. Arnold, a drug industry analyst at Credit Suisse, said her
latest study of the nation�s eight biggest pharmaceutical companies
showed markedly similar results: list prices rising an average of 8.7
percent in the 12 months ending Sept. 30 � the highest rate of growth
since at least 2004.
As does Professor Schondelmeyer, Ms. Arnold based her price calculations
on reported wholesale prices and a formula that puts more emphasis on
each company�s best-selling drugs.
Ms. Arnold said the prospect of cost containment under health care
reform, as well as the tougher business environment, entered into the
decisions of manufacturers to raise prices this year.
The industry stands to gain about 30 million customers with drug
insurance from the legislation pending in Congress. But the industry
also faces the prospect of tougher negotiations from both public and
private buyers as the government tries to squeeze savings out of the
health system.
�If you�re going to take price increases,� Ms. Arnold said, �here and
now might be the place to do that, because the next year and the year
after that might be tough.�
Mr. Johnson did not dispute the Credit Suisse study or deny Ms. Arnold�s
finding that American drug makers have raised prices at the fastest rate
in five years.
He said both studies were incomplete by failing to include rebates that
drug makers give distributors. But Ms. Arnold, Professor Schondelmeyer
and a 2007 Congressional study of Medicare said the rebates often accrue
to the middlemen, not consumers, and higher manufacturer prices lead to
higher retail prices.
And the drug industry�s own major consulting firm, IMS Health, has also
reported a significant run-up in prices. Back in April, IMS predicted
that United States drug sales might actually decline this year.
Billy Tauzin, president of the industry�s trade association, highlighted
the gloomy prediction in a June 1 letter to President Obama shortly
before striking the deal to cut drug costs by $80 billion. In
negotiating the deal, the drug makers argued that they could not afford
to give up more than that.
But in October, IMS made an unusual change in the middle of its
forecasting cycle, saying it now believed United States sales would grow
at least 4.5 percent in 2009 � or $21 billion more than expected six
months earlier.
A major reason, IMS said, was higher-than-expected price increases for
drugs in the United States.
Rick Saunders
> Part of the ObamaTapDance? - "Drug Makers Raise Prices in Face of Health
> Care Reform"
>
> Is anyone surprised by this?
Only fools who think that Congress' pledge of much higher
taxes on EVERYONE won't apply to them. The drug makers
will be lucky if The One doesn't nationalize them to further
his dream of ObamaCare.
Phlip
> Part of the ObamaTapDance? - "Drug Makers Raise Prices in Face of Health
> Care Reform"
>
> Is anyone surprised by this?
Not at all. They see reform coming, and the cushy deal they made with Bush
ending, so they have some last-minute gouging.
How is this Obama's fault? Or maybe we shouldn't try for reform, because it
would inconvenience a few non-human billionaires?
Killing, Inc.
> C.Tudor wrote:
> > Part of the ObamaTapDance? - "Drug Makers Raise Prices in Face of Health
> > Care Reform"
>
> > Is anyone surprised by this?
>
> Not at all. They see reform coming,
They see the end of capitalism and economic freedom coming, and
fascist ObaMAO and his traitor followers are to blame.
Have a nice day.
Phlip
You got it all figured out.
Keep paying an arm and leg to your corporate masters for us, k?
The Rock
"Killing, Inc." <i.am.kil...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:be136cb2-fb62-49c5...@a32g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
No, what they're seeing is the end of Fascism of the Bush era. They were
controling
the government instead of the other way around. Dictating to the government
what
they wanted and we're still seeing it with Repugs in Congress, ignoring
what's good for
the American people so as to protect the indecent profit of the insurance
companies
and health industry.
--
www.lightningnews.com Lightning fast anonymous usenet downloads for 5$ only !
Killing, Inc.
> "Killing, Inc." <i.am.killing....@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:be136cb2-fb62-49c5...@a32g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
>
> > On Nov 16, 2:09 pm, Phlip <phlip2...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> C.Tudor wrote:
> >> > Part of the ObamaTapDance? - "Drug Makers Raise Prices in Face of
> >> > Health
> >> > Care Reform"
>
> >> > Is anyone surprised by this?
>
> >> Not at all. They see reform coming,
>
> > They see the end of capitalism and economic freedom coming, and
> > fascist ObaMAO and his traitor followers are to blame.
>
> > Have a nice day.
>
> No, what they're seeing is the end of Fascism of the Bush era. They were
> controling
> the government instead of the other way around.
Then it's not fascism at all. The government control of healthcare
that ObaMAO and Pelosi are pushing is the definition of economic
fascism. Once you have that in place, social fascism isn't far behind.
Have a nice day.
> Dictating to the government
> what
> they wanted and we're still seeing it with Repugs in Congress, ignoring
> what's good for
> the American people so as to protect the indecent profit of the insurance
> companies
> and health industry.
>
> --www.lightningnews.comLightning fast anonymous usenet downloads for 5$ only !
Phlip
> Then it's not fascism at all. The government control of healthcare
> that ObaMAO and Pelosi are pushing is the definition of economic
> fascism. Once you have that in place, social fascism isn't far behind.
Fascism is when business & gov't collude. Not when gov't forces business not to
steal.
"recisions" are stealing. The majority of personal bankruptcies in the US are
medical bankruptcies caused by insurers refusing to pay for life-saving treatments.
This is fascism - business lobbyists bought loopholes from Congress to make
theft (and manslaughter) legal for them. Fixing the situation means less fascism.
Buerste
"Phlip" <phli...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:yEjMm.29232$X01....@newsfe07.iad...
You have the option of not buying their products.
Killing, Inc.
Mussolini proposed the same thing, to seize control of industries
without removing the business itself or deprivation of personal
property in an effort to restrain a perceived threat from economic
liberalism (aka capitalism).
ObaMAO's "fixing" of the situation reduces capitalism and adds more of
Mussolini's ideas of a perfect society.
Have a nice day.
Phlip
>> Keep paying an arm and leg to your corporate masters for us, k?
>
> You have the option of not buying their products.
You try it and get back to us how that works out, okay?
Buerste
What did people do before? Why are someone else's inventions your right to
take at a price that YOU want to pay? How about if you boss says "I don't
want to pay you for your work at such-n-such an amount but he will pay you
less because he thinks you don't deserve more? Or, nationalize the drug
companies and you might never see a new drug.
5279 Dead, 412 since 1/20/09
I wonder if he supports a strong public option, which would INCREASE his
options.
C.Tudor
Just because Bush was an idiot doesn't mean that The ObamaTapDancer
isn't a chronic liar. That's a fallacy called "the false dilemma."
Maybe we should start controlling prices in the health care industry and
the health insurance industry instead of having the ObamaConArtist
making deals that will pay big money to the Lobbyist interests at
extreme cost to the lower middle class. Calling it a reform doesn't
make it actually be a reform. The facts have to come first and the
words afterward. That's the difference between telling the truth and
telling lies. Did you send the email? Did you find out how much money
he's gotten?
---