Posted on 01/16/2013 3:01:42 AM PST by SoFloFreeper
The U.S health care system could save over $1 billion dollars a year if they replace current antiretroviral drugs for HIV infection with generic versions of the medications, a risky move that could seriously affect the efficacy of HIV treatment.
The implications of such a change was explored in a study published in the January 15 edition of Annals of Internal Medicine.
(Excerpt) Read more at medicalnewstoday.com ...
BUT this is a good lesson for those homosexuals who think Obama is "pro-freedom". When the government gets to dictate how patients are treated, the incentive for researchers in the medical field is diminished....because the motivations for creating new treatments is removed when profits are limited.
Not to mention the high COSTS involved in medical research.
No matter WHAT the affliction: AIDS, cancer, athlete's foot...the best solution is not government mandates for treatment. A MARKET that addresses the needs is better.
Bath House Barry throws his own fellow “bathers” under the pill bus.....
Tyrants always turn on their own on their way to the top of the heap of bodies they leave in their wake....
Patents expire, generics of all drugs eventually come in to play.
The only "RISK" here is because the generics will require three doses per day instead of one per day of the most current branded version which is still covered by patents. The "RISK" is only if the patient fails to take the medication as directed. That's not Obama's fault.
The money due the company for R&D has already been made under a patent system that has expanded terms since our Founding, from 14 years to typical 20 for drugs.
Get over it!
Will these drugs work or will the patient gradually experience a "deteriorating condition" and be taken by some other illness along the way so that the reason can't be traced back to inferior generic drugs?
This is the possibility that those in the afflicted community now face.
The savings to the government is not the switch to generics, it's the reduction of patients.
I'm not sure why you're attacking the Freepers above. I've seen directly where many generic drugs simply don't work the way that the name brand varieties do. The doctors administering to those patients did not recommend taking a higher dosage and in some cases specified the need for the name brand rather than risk the patient's health.
In life or death scenarios, there may not be the time to go through that routine.
OTOH, I like the suggestion to take more if the doctor sanctions it. They could always increase the dosage and prescription amount.
Kneejerk reactions happen here often, but this seems to be a valid concern for anyone who knows someone with HIV.
I always remember that when I hear or read about HIV.
Switching to generic drug treatment will also save the government because patients will expire faster ...
“Switching to generic drug treatment will also save the government because patients will expire faster ...”
You hit the nail on the head!
do your homework, people who take their medications today do not expire from AIDS
Anyone with a chronic disease requiring expensive medication better start preparing their will. ObamaCare can’t afford this “investment” in those costing more than they are worth. It’s the utilitarian side of Marxism.
Nah, I’ll refer to the medical site article that says the use of generics can harm the efficacy.
And when the Obama clown REQUIRES those generics (and that will happen), the profits of the original R & D company will sink....and that will harm future development of new treatments and drugs.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.