Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

F.Y.I.
1 posted on 01/23/2005 4:47:17 AM PST by ResistorSister
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: ResistorSister

A Canadian doctor was recently busted for countersigning prescriptions for American patients he had never met, to allow them to buy up our supply of drugs over the Internet. He has reportedly earned about $250,000 in the six months he was in business for doing this.

Since this is Canada where nobody is punished no matter what he does, the likely punishment for this will be a "reprimand" and he gets to keep the money.

The serious problem being caused in Canada by the Americans buying up all the 'cheap' drugs is that we in Canada can't get the drugs from our own doctors. That, and not the problems this is causing in the USA, is what has started the government crackdown on the pipeline to the States.


2 posted on 01/23/2005 4:55:19 AM PST by KateatRFM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ResistorSister

We have a prescription drug benefit going into force next year for the Geritol Set and they're still whining about "sticker shock." Cripes!


3 posted on 01/23/2005 4:55:23 AM PST by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ResistorSister

Why do drug companies sell drugs in Canada? Because they get ten years of patent protection and a captive market.

Oh evil Canada. Oh the poor Merks and Bayers they can't use dollar bills for toilet paper because of the evil socialist Canadian medical system.

Get used to it America your being ripped off by drug companies half of which are based in Europe.


4 posted on 01/23/2005 4:58:51 AM PST by beaver fever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ResistorSister
Now they must sell the pills to countries with socialized medicine where costs are controlled by laws instead of the free market.

Could you help me with this claim? Who says they "must sell to countries with socialized med"... and the article further connotes that this sale is at a below market price.

I don't think they "have to" sell to socialized countries... and I'm dang sure they don't have to sell to anyone below market.

I think that some drug companies choose to sell a few bits of drugs below market for PR - but nothing beyond a strong marketing budget.

If Canucks (or anyone else) have unlimited access to cheap drugs, it's because their taxes subsidize prices... making it so that our access to the drugs amounts to Canadian gov't subsidies of US individual drug purchases.

That being said, your point that we pay high prices so that others can have low prices, is not far off IMO. Just ask the UN.

6 posted on 01/23/2005 5:06:19 AM PST by Principled
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ResistorSister
They have only a few years to sell it at full price before it goes generic.

BS. They modify the formula slightly and re-issue under a new patent and a new name, thus extending the time before it can go generic.

About half the drugs on the market are actually researched, developed, and produced overseas. Prilosec, for example, a big seller for acid reflux, is a product of Sweden. India, Japan, Israel, and Germany are MAJOR drug producers. These articles that imply that the US carries all of the burden for research, development and production are disingenuous.
12 posted on 01/23/2005 5:24:13 AM PST by TomGuy (America: Best friend or worst enemy. Choose wisely.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ResistorSister
$400 a month is definitely steep, but one should probably look at the cost in a relative sense. What is one getting in exchange for the $400? Sounds like a pain free existence, as opposed to ongoing, debilitating pain.

Sounds like a bargain in some respects. And once the patent expires, the cost will become much more manageable.

15 posted on 01/23/2005 5:30:34 AM PST by Mr. Bird
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ResistorSister

23 posted on 01/23/2005 5:44:52 AM PST by Reform4Bush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ResistorSister
Top 10 Ranking by R&D expenditures in 2001. From http://www.p-d-r.com/ranking/Executives_Guide_2002.pdf#search='drug%20sales%20ranking'

1 Pfizer                 4450
2 GlaxoSmithKline        3555
3 AstraZeneca            2655
4 Aventis                2579
5 Merck & Co.            2456
5 Johnson & Johnson      2456
7 Bristol-Myers Squibb   2140
8 Novartis               2130
9 Eli Lilly              2125
10 Pharmacia Corporation 2085

Of these, GlaxoSmithKline, Aventis, and Novartis are headquartered in Europe. Since 2001, Pfizer and Pharmacia have merged. Also Aventis and Sanofi have merged.

Of course, all these are huge multi-national corporations, and the European companies have large US operations and R&D labs. The US companies also have large operations and R&D labs in Europe. The industry has consolidated rapidly over the past few years, with companies on both sides of the Atlantic acquiring each other.

32 posted on 01/23/2005 6:00:40 AM PST by Lessismore
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ResistorSister

Hey, look. Some drugs are just too expensive to pay the US price on. If the choice is between buying a foreign drug import at reduced price or not buying the drug at all, I don't see the problem with importation.

Supposedly, the problem comes with substitution - when people buy the foreign versions of drugs they'd buy anyway.

I don't see this as a major problem. The market is just going through an arbitrage phase. There are plenty of foreign and university-based development programs. Buying cheaper drugs from Canada or anywhere else will hardly stop drug development in America or anywhere else. That's something a profiteer would say when he realizes his huge margins are coming under threat.

The government has already shot its credibility on this issue by warning that drugs from Canada might somehow be 'dangerous.' That's pretty funny, I remember living in the Yukon for a bit and taking some Canadian meds, and I'm still alive!


35 posted on 01/23/2005 6:02:53 AM PST by seacapn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Mrs Zip; BOBWADE

ping


41 posted on 01/23/2005 6:17:39 AM PST by zip (Remember: DimocRat lies told often enough became truth to 48% of Americans)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ResistorSister

Interesting post and FReeper discussion. Thanks.


42 posted on 01/23/2005 6:23:14 AM PST by PGalt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ResistorSister
Now they must sell the pills to countries with socialized medicine where costs are controlled by laws instead of the free market.

The fallacy of that argument is that no, they don't have to sell the pills to Canada or any other country. Nobody is forcing them to. The long and short of it is if they were losing money selling pharmaceuticals to countries with socialized medicine then they wouldn't do it. The profit they make selling there just isn't as large as the profit they make selling here.

44 posted on 01/23/2005 6:36:14 AM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ResistorSister

Quote: My case has a silver lining. I have prescription insurance.




Don't be fooled. The raising costs of medications also contribute to the raising insurance costs. We recently had to find a new insurance carrier because the UCLA system here in So Cal stopped accepting payments from the one we were using. Our rates went from about $800/mo to about $1,300/mo for a lot less coverage and included higher co-payments. The high costs of services and medications were not being covered under our old policy. So we pay either way!!


50 posted on 01/23/2005 9:20:53 AM PST by SeerSucker (Left coast righty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ResistorSister

Not only are the drug companies selling these drugs to other nations at a lower wholesale price than they are selling in the US, but they are also "giving" drugs to underdeveloped countries and calling it a charitable donation. The reality is that the drug companies sell the drugs cheaply to other countries, give some drugs away as "charity" to underdeveloped countries and then they set the price for the drugs sold in the US such that they make a profit. American are paying to make up for what the companies lose doing business elsewhere.

I have no problem with any business making a fair profit but to do so in this manner forces the people of the US to pay for the rest of the worlds prescription drugs. And the rest of the world treats the US like $hit.


56 posted on 01/23/2005 10:01:51 AM PST by ArmedNReady (Islam, the cancer on humanity.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson