ChatterBank1 min ago
Drugs And Drug Companies
18 Answers
When a drug company puts a drug on the market they can charge what they like for it, rightly so if they've paid millions in research blah blah blah, is there a certain amount of time before other companies can start manufacturing it as a generic alternative?
I was prompted by the breast cancer drug that has been withdrawn due to cost and was wondering, well really hoping that a generic, cheaper version will be available in a few years time.
I was prompted by the breast cancer drug that has been withdrawn due to cost and was wondering, well really hoping that a generic, cheaper version will be available in a few years time.
Answers
1 to 18 of 18
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by rockyracoon. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Now that I don't know - I only know that some of the companies whose reps I used to work alongside got twitchy when the licence was due - other companies could starting producing the same stuff, potentially at lesser cost. NIHCE always looks for cost-effectiveness....
That breast cancer drug was going to cost something like £90K per patient, as I understand it?
That breast cancer drug was going to cost something like £90K per patient, as I understand it?
This is a bit techinical but it talks about the law on patent (on specific drugs) - perhaps I should have used that term rather than Licence) - and costing for the NHS. http://
"Nationalised " means State Controlled......other countries do not fancy State intervention and hence research cannot be "internationalised."
State Control cannot financing health care is in a spot of bother at the moment and to ask them to take on more drug research would be piling on the problems.....in this case for the tax payer.
State Control cannot financing health care is in a spot of bother at the moment and to ask them to take on more drug research would be piling on the problems.....in this case for the tax payer.
When the licence expires it is worthless to the company that developed it. A simple migraine tablet cost over £50 each when it was first available and GPs used to prescribe it in packs of 2. Now you can buy it over the counter for pennies. That company would have made its money because there are so many migraine sufferers around the world.
I often wonder about drugs for very rare diseases. Where is the incentive in developing those drugs when there will be relatively few patients who will need it, especially if those patients are mainly in third world countries where the cost may be prohibitive to anyone who needs it.
I am also puzzled by the difficulties cancer patients in the UK have in getting the drugs they need. With so much money raised by charities for cancer drug research and development why are the drugs not affordable?
I often wonder about drugs for very rare diseases. Where is the incentive in developing those drugs when there will be relatively few patients who will need it, especially if those patients are mainly in third world countries where the cost may be prohibitive to anyone who needs it.
I am also puzzled by the difficulties cancer patients in the UK have in getting the drugs they need. With so much money raised by charities for cancer drug research and development why are the drugs not affordable?
I always think it`s a shame when you hear on the news of a UK laboratory/UK scientists have made an amazing breakthrough which could result in a ground-breaking drug in a few years` time. And who benefits? The US drug companies of course. Some of these are our customers at work and they are HUGE (and very good customers). It`s such a shame that the UK can`t benefit from UK research and reap the profits here instead of across the pond.
My FB newsfeed is full of the lady that was on the news the other day, apparently she lives down the road and I have a couple of friends that know her. I remember hearing them talk of one of the mums at their kids school being told she was dying of cancer and being offered this new drug. Just brings it home a bit more I suppose.
"Sorry kids, mummy's going to die cos the drugs that keep me alive are too expensive"
I don't know what the answer is really :(
"Sorry kids, mummy's going to die cos the drugs that keep me alive are too expensive"
I don't know what the answer is really :(
While I agree clearly the Govt couldn't support research without some massive changes, personally I'd prefer my taxes to go towards something like this rather than an endless array of benefits, to some extent foreign aid and also subsidising the Arts.
At the end of the day I fail to see how anyone can can honestly justify £90,000 for a course of tablets, I wonder how much of that is profit.
At the end of the day I fail to see how anyone can can honestly justify £90,000 for a course of tablets, I wonder how much of that is profit.
Terrible as it is someone has to make a decision if it is worth spending £90,000 to keep one patient alive for an extra 4 to 6 months, which is all the new cancer drug is claimed to do. It is NOT a cure if it was it would be worth every penny and more.
Someone has to decide by taking into account what other work could be done with that £90,000 not a job I would want!
Someone has to decide by taking into account what other work could be done with that £90,000 not a job I would want!
1 to 18 of 18
