Cancer Cured in Canada? Pharma in the Way?

[Doc50]

Why are we forced to pay more than Canadians for the exact same drug?

Because the drugs are developed here, we pay more -- if Canada or Mexico or Brazil had a separate federal agency that required separate testing, then the cost of the drugs would be incrementally higher.

 

[CowboyMcCoy]

Lol. All 27 people in Canada? How many drugs can one person take?

I hope he was joking.

 

[AbeBeta]

Because the drugs are developed here, we pay more -- if Canada or Mexico or Brazil had a separate federal agency that required separate testing, then the cost of the drugs would be incrementally higher.

Really? The most prominent "Big Pharma" companies are listed below. Certainly the US is well represented but not dominant

AstraZeneca - London
Bayer - Germany
Boehringer Ingelheim - Germany
Bristol-Myers Squibb - New York
Eli Lilly and Company - Indiana
Genzyme Corporation - Cambridge, MA
GlaxoSmithKline -- London
Merck - New Jersey
Novartis - Switzerland
Pfizer - New York
Sanofi-Aventis - France

 

[CowboyMcCoy]

Really? The most prominent "Big Pharma" companies are listed below. Certainly the US is well represented but not dominant

AstraZeneca - London
Bayer - Germany
Boehringer Ingelheim - Germany
Bristol-Myers Squibb - New York
Eli Lilly and Company - Indiana
Genzyme Corporation - Cambridge, MA
GlaxoSmithKline -- London
Merck - New Jersey
Novartis - Switzerland
Pfizer - New York
Sanofi-Aventis - France

5 of 11 is 3 more than any other country. And over twice as much as any other country. I'd say we have a stronghold.

 

[AbeBeta]

5 of 11 is 3 more than any other country. And over twice as much as any other country. I'd say we have a stronghold.

The point is that half the drugs aren't developed here so the issue with pricing can't be attributed to ALL the drugs being developed here. I doubt you'd see a difference in pricing between those made in the US and elsewhere

Also when you consider that Germany has about 1/4 the population we do and the UK about 1/5 it sorta seems like they are the ones with the real stronghold

 

[CowboyMcCoy]

The point is that half the drugs aren't developed here so the issue with pricing can't be attributed to ALL the drugs being developed here. I doubt you'd see a difference in pricing between those made in the US and elsewhere

Also when you consider that Germany has about 1/4 the population we do and the UK about 1/5 it sorta seems like they are the ones with the real stronghold

Why would population of those countries matter when we sell medication to most of the world?

 

[Yakuza Rich]

That's such a myth. The Earth is freaking huge. The only thing we might populate ourselves into is being unable to be controlled by some, and that's the real issue.

If there is a cure for AIDS or cancer and it is not being used except for a select few, or not being released to the general public, then those who are doing the latter can go **** themselves.

Magic Johnson supposedly got AIDS 20+ years ago, yet he's doing fine. *** is up with that?

I agree.

Cancer and AIDS are not very prevalent. They are out there and lots of people have died from them, but they are not anywhere near the prevalency of major killers like heart disease.

The reason why people discuss cancer and AIDS is because they are horrible diseases to be inflicted with.

I'm not sure I would go and say that big pharma is preventing cures, outright, from becoming public. But, I think they have zero interest in having their scientists and researchers find a cure, so instead the researches find a drug that can control it and charge a lot of money for it.






YR

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

5 of 11 is 3 more than any other country. And over twice as much as any other country. I'd say we have a stronghold.

And we are easily 3 times the size of any of those other countries so I think that if you really look at it, it's pretty well even in terms of relative size, population etc. Financially, we certainly have a larger economy but we are not larger then the Combined Euro Market which all of these countries are tied to.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Why would population of those countries matter when we sell medication to most of the world?

It matters because it allows for a larger populace from which to support the product, especially for R&D products that receive funding from the Federal Government. More tax payers means more funding available to support more PHARMA. We do see to all countries but they also sell to us.

 

[AbeBeta]

Why would population of those countries matter when we sell medication to most of the world?

Just pointing out that if we "dominated" the market you would expect us to have far more of the big companies. This also speaks directly to the arguments about who is paying to produce the medicines. You would think if the original argument were correct that England and Germany would have massively high drug costs because they have more of the big companies per capita

 

[AbeBeta]

Cancer and AIDS are not very prevalent. They are out there and lots of people have died from them, but they are not anywhere near the prevalency of major killers like heart disease.

In the US maybe. AIDS in particular has incredibly high prevalence rates in many countries. HIV/AIDS is the most preventable disease as there is really no genetic component to it.

 

[Doomsday]

There is no money in curing these diseases, the big dollars are spent to keep it in check. A lifetime of dedicated customers, better than a one time cure.

 

[LehighCowboy]

I agree.

Cancer and AIDS are not very prevalent. They are out there and lots of people have died from them, but they are not anywhere near the prevalency of major killers like heart disease.

The reason why people discuss cancer and AIDS is because they are horrible diseases to be inflicted with.

I'm not sure I would go and say that big pharma is preventing cures, outright, from becoming public. But, I think they have zero interest in having their scientists and researchers find a cure, so instead the researches find a drug that can control it and charge a lot of money for it.

1 out of 2 men and 1 out of 3 women will get some form of cancer in their lifetime in the United States (per my med school pathology professor). That's pretty prevalent, if you ask me.

 

[Hoofbite]

Why are we forced to pay more than Canadians for the exact same drug?

Canada's government refuses to pay as much because they are the main provider of healthcare in Canada and don't have anyone who can purchase nearly as much as they do.

 

[Doc50]

Just pointing out that if we "dominated" the market you would expect us to have far more of the big companies. This also speaks directly to the arguments about who is paying to produce the medicines. You would think if the original argument were correct that England and Germany would have massively high drug costs because they have more of the big companies per capita

The European countries that are required to do their own FDA-type trials do have high non-generic drug prices; the consumer just doesn't usually have to pay them, since it's part of each individual's national healthcare policy. Mind you, the use of name-brand drugs is restricted under that system, such that specific diagnoses and documentation must be present in order for the patient to be supplied a non-generic drug. You can always pay retail price (outside of the system), but most would not choose to do that because of the cost.

All prescription drugs sold in the US (regardless of the company's corporate location) must go through the FDA approval process, which as I previously mentioned, is meticulous and expensive. And wouldn't you want it to be exhaustive? Wouldn't we all want to assure that approved drugs are the safest possible, with all potential complications elicited?

 

[CanadianCowboysFan]

That's such a myth. The Earth is freaking huge. The only thing we might populate ourselves into is being unable to be controlled by some, and that's the real issue.

If there is a cure for AIDS or cancer and it is not being used except for a select few, or not being released to the general public, then those who are doing the latter can go **** themselves.

Magic Johnson supposedly got AIDS 20+ years ago, yet he's doing fine. *** is up with that?

He really only had HIV, never had AIDS as far as I am aware.

They have new drugs that slow the development of the virus so he benefited.

Getting HIV is no longer a death sentence.

 

[TheSport78]

Cancer survival rates in the US are generally better than those in other countries, including Europe.

http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/se...l-rates-in-usa-better-than-europe-and-canada/

Yeah, you know why? Because they don't GET cancer as often as Americans do. That study is pretty misleading.

 

[The30YardSlant]

Why are we forced to pay more than Canadians for the exact same drug?

Because nothing of note is developed in Canada. The vast, vast majority of drug study, development and approval occurs in the U.S. and Europe (most notably England and Germany). Canada doesn't have any organization that requires seperate drug approval, they simply piggyback onto all the research and trials done in other nations.

 

[The30YardSlant]

I agree.

Cancer and AIDS are not very prevalent. They are out there and lots of people have died from them, but they are not anywhere near the prevalency of major killers like heart disease.

The reason why people discuss cancer and AIDS is because they are horrible diseases to be inflicted with.

I'm not sure I would go and say that big pharma is preventing cures, outright, from becoming public. But, I think they have zero interest in having their scientists and researchers find a cure, so instead the researches find a drug that can control it and charge a lot of money for it.






YR

Approximately 55 million people died in 2011 worldwide. 8 million died from cancer, nearly 2 million died from AIDS.

In other words, 18% of deaths were the result of those two diseases. Now, considering that the chances of dying of either disease (especially cancer) naturally increases with age, we're talking about HUGE numbers of people being kept alive as the years go on who otherwise wouldn't be.

Studies have been done on this, and they all suggest that our population growth would explode.

 

[AbeBeta]

Canada's government refuses to pay as much because they are the main provider of healthcare in Canada and don't have anyone who can purchase nearly as much as they do.

This is more the answer than anything. And a big reason why Pharma doesn't want that structure in the US