The "Canadian Pharmacy" Canard: Does It Fly?

I am a big fan of American pharmaceutical companies. Yes...yes...they are evil incarnate according to the left, and they certainly aren't in the business for the cleansing of their souls. And thank God for that!

I want my pharma companies to be hard-nosed businesses that strive to invent and perfect life-saving drugs that they can sell me for a big fat profit, which they can then turn around and invent more life-saving drugs, which they can sell me for a big profit...

One of big pharma's many success stories is "Ivermectin," a drug discovered by an academic and a drug company scientist that is an excellent and safe therapy for onchocerciasis, otherwise known as "River Blindness," which is the world's second-leading cause of blindness. Nobody is making any money selling this drug to the people at risk, but recently somebody discovered that it also works for rosacea, so there are now a bunch of upper-middle-class women spending lots of money for (in most cases) cosmetic reasons. And that is just glorious!

Another example is eflornithine, which was a crappy cancer drug, but a marvelous drug to combat trypanosomiasis, or "sleeping sickness." But how to pay for it? Well, it also impedes the growth of women's facial hair, so those suburban housewives get to pay for saving lives!

There are hundreds of these examples, and tens of thousands more examples of multi-million dollar research programs that went...nowhere.

But the no-nothings in the media and government want the drug companies to sell their products at the marginal cost to produce them, rather than a price that would recoup the massive development costs for successful and unsuccessful drugs. And one way they want to drive costs down is to import from Canada! Now...that sounds fine, at least on the surface. Because Canada probably has a robust regulatory structure to ensure at least some minimum quality...right?

But no...what these knuckleheads want is to use Canada as a conduit for third-world producers to undercut American pharma. You know, those marvelous high-tech factories in India and China and Indonesia and Vietnam producing the finest quality pharmaceuticals!

Here's an article that points out some of the problems with that plan. It's not perfect...the author seems to play a bit fast and loose with logic, and she is writing for a trade organization.

Look at the facts. Drug importation is dangerous.

But it certainly raises some interesting issues.

In a perfect world the American regulatory scheme would be designed to streamline the process of bringing drugs to market while still providing some minimum level of protection for the consumer. But it has morphed into a byzantine hell, in which good drugs are delayed while reformulations of old drugs are fast-tracked.

It really is a perfect government program. It drives up the cost of the products produced, while other parts of the government are conspiring to drive down the price charged by the producer. If I didn't know any better, I would think that there is some plan to drive these companies out of business.

Posted by: CBD at 12:15 PM




Comments

(Jump to bottom of page)

1 1st?

Posted by: dresden at April 14, 2019 12:17 PM (zuce7)

2 Fine, I'll be wing man

Posted by: Skip at April 14, 2019 12:19 PM (BbGew)

3 I called the corgis

Posted by: Skip at April 14, 2019 12:20 PM (BbGew)

4

What's this?

Kim Jung Uno was just "re-elected?"

hahahahahaha!

Posted by: Soothsayer -- Fake Commenter at April 14, 2019 12:21 PM (AVPWa)

5 Wait til they start importing 3rd world pot. The fentanyl is rocking

Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at April 14, 2019 12:21 PM (aA3+G)

6 Top 10!

Posted by: Thanatopsis at April 14, 2019 12:23 PM (LgsIT)

7 (Still had the book thread up)
Orange Man does say Canada is getting US prescriptions dirt cheap, I don't know much about it as I am not taking anything that would be cheaper across the border.

Posted by: Skip at April 14, 2019 12:23 PM (BbGew)

8 Good morning CBD,

Why is a drug, that is manufactured by the same big pharma company in the US, sold inside the US for $60 a pill, and sold outside the US for $3 a pill?

I'll hang up and listen.

Posted by: rickb223 at April 14, 2019 12:25 PM (dDUXP)

9

Bernie will take care of it!

Posted by: Bertram Cabot, Jr. at April 14, 2019 12:25 PM (aKsyK)

10
Federal
Regulation of drugs began in 1906 with the unconstitutional Pure Food
and Drug Act. And it has gotten much worse since then. The FDA
should be abolished.

Posted by: Vic at April 14, 2019 12:25 PM (mpXpK)

11
Why is a drug, that is manufactured by the same big pharma company in the US, sold inside the US for $60 a pill, and sold outside the US for $3 a pill?

Somebody asked me why insulin costs $500 a month.

Posted by: Bertram Cabot, Jr. at April 14, 2019 12:26 PM (aKsyK)

12 sold inside the US for $60 a pill, and sold outside the US for $3 a pill? "

Ahem.

Posted by: Anon a mouse at April 14, 2019 12:26 PM (6qErC)

13 It's amazing how many drugs are available that save lives (reduce stroke and heart attacks) or make them less miserable (treat poison ivy and anti-fungals).

Not a pollyanna, but the drug industry is a huge asset.

Posted by: smilin jack at April 14, 2019 12:27 PM (yDxHh)

14 I use albuterol. It's a "rescue" inhaler. When my O2 lebels get too low, it helps. Sometimes, I need to use it fairly often. I am supposed to be able to get a refill every 30 days. The new insurance company decided I can only use 2 puffs a day, which means every 100 days. I had to have my doctor rewrite the prescription again. Last time, there was heavy smoke in the area, but they decided to restrict how often I could refill.

I now buy mine from In House Pharmacy in Vanatuu. People can die from asthma, if they don't have an inhaler. I'm not at that level of urgency but having your oxygen level at the high 60%is crippling. There is no reason to restrict the sale or use of these. People don't use them to get high. They cost me a quarter of the price from overseas. And they come from New Zealand pharmacies.

I understand what you are saying about the manufacturers but I disagree with restricting where we can get these products.

Posted by: Notsothoreau at April 14, 2019 12:27 PM (Lqy/e)

15 I would be a lot more supportive of the American drug market, if it weren't for the fact that the American drug market has essentially the same business model between the legal" drugs being sold, and the illegal ones.

Got a problem?

Here, take a pill!

The human brain essentially treats the legal ones the same as the illegal ones, and it creates zombies who cannot live without their drugs.

People being conditioned to believe their problems will be solved with drugs... is not a good thing. Period.

Which may not be relevant to the point being made here, but that's where I get stuck whenever the discussion of the battle over Big Pharma gets rolling.

Posted by: BurtTC at April 14, 2019 12:28 PM (cY3LT)

16 Other than being a disordered sodomite and the mayor of a crappy town in Indiana, why is mayor buttplugger a thing?

-
Didja see the Mayor of Seattle's response to Trump's plan to share the illegals?

Mayor Jenny Durkan
@MayorJenny
Instead of threatening immigrant families and the cities that welcome them, this president should spend a little more time learning from cities like Seattle.

-
Shorter: Let's shithole America!

Posted by: Anonosaurus Wrecks, Tyrannosaur Wrangler at April 14, 2019 12:28 PM (+y/Ru)

17 I have Myasthenia Gravis, and the medication that I have to take for that is outrageously expensive, even at discounted rates.

Unfortunately, it is also the same compound which is used in a nerve gas, and most people can't tolerate even a 15 mg dose without feeling miserable for a few hours. But for people with MG, it allows them to get around for a couple of hours.

I sure as heck don't want to take a chance on an unregulated version of that drug!

Posted by: Teresa in Fort Worth, Texas at April 14, 2019 12:29 PM (uDcBt)

18 TL;DNR
Canucks are evil.

Posted by: Big Pharma at April 14, 2019 12:30 PM (b1Yfy)

19 There is no reason to restrict the sale or use of these"

Government. It's what we do together.

It's the balloon model. Squeeze in one area (price controls) and another swells. If "everyone" limited prices, then supply would fall...

Posted by: Anon a mouse at April 14, 2019 12:31 PM (6qErC)

20 Just take an aspirin. Ahoy!

Posted by: Little Admiral Kristol at April 14, 2019 12:31 PM (EgshT)

21 I guess we are really talking about R&D costs here. At what point do we consider the costs recouped?

Posted by: Notsothoreau at April 14, 2019 12:32 PM (Lqy/e)

22 But it has morphed into a byzantine hell, in which good drugs are delayed while reformulations of old drugs are fast-tracked.

It really is a perfect government program.
_______

That's an example of what has long been one of the arguments against republics, that they are almost impossible to reform. At least from within. And one reason the idea of a strong man ("monarchy" in the original sense; not necessarily hereditary) gets it appeal from that.

One common error of the modern mind is the assumption that, because we have built a political system rather better than earlier examples of our model, the old strictures no longer apply.

Posted by: Eeyore at April 14, 2019 12:33 PM (VaN/j)

23 I bypass the American and Canadian pharmacies and get all my viagra from some shady outfit on the 2nd floor of 3189 Toloun Street in Taipei.

They go by the name of Canadian Pharmacy Online to keep it under the radar.

Quick, fast service and they haven't ripped of my credit card yet.

Posted by: Hairyback Guy at April 14, 2019 12:33 PM (Z+IKu)

24 I understand what you are saying about the manufacturers but I disagree with restricting where we can get these products.
=====

Choices. If you get a bad batch, who you gonna sue -- the lawyers would not be happy.


Posted by: mustbequantum at April 14, 2019 12:33 PM (MIKMs)

25 The effect of pharmaceuticals:

https://bit.ly/2VFXAIE

Posted by: Anonosaurus Wrecks, Tyrannosaur Wrangler at April 14, 2019 12:34 PM (+y/Ru)

26 guess we are really talking about R&D costs "
Companies exist to provide jerbs, don't you know? Profits are eeeevil.

Posted by: Anon a mouse at April 14, 2019 12:37 PM (6qErC)

27 I would sue the New Zealand company that made it. There's no protects against getting a bad batch when you have a prescription refilled in the US.

I can understand hesitation when dealing with Indian or Chinese companies. I feel like New Zealand and Australian pharmaceutical companies can turn out a quality product.

Posted by: Notsothoreau at April 14, 2019 12:37 PM (Lqy/e)

28 8 Good morning CBD,

Why is a drug, that is manufactured by the same big pharma company in the US, sold inside the US for $60 a pill, and sold outside the US for $3 a pill?

I'll hang up and listen.
Posted by: rickb223 at April 14, 2019 12:25 PM (dDUXP)


That's a very good question. Apparently the pharma companies negotiate prices with foreign governments who have socialized medicine, which leaves them able to charge whatever they can get away with inside the US.

This is not exactly a "free market". It sounds more like Americans are subsidizing government health care plans in foreign countries.

Posted by: rickl at April 14, 2019 12:38 PM (sdi6R)

29 In fairness, reformulations of old drugs tend to get swift approval because they entail the same active pharmaceutical ingredient, which has already undergone extensive testing and review (which is the time-consuming part of FDA approval).

In addition, there is a limited number of ingredients that is commonly used in formulations generally, and they have been extensively tested and reviewed previously also.

So all that really has to be tested in a reformulation is the combination of a known API with known formulation ingredients, and that's pretty much a chip shot.

Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara at April 14, 2019 12:39 PM (YqDXo)

30 Rickl is right. We subsidize R&D costs by paying more than other countries for the same product.

Posted by: Notsothoreau at April 14, 2019 12:39 PM (Lqy/e)

31 It sounds more like Americans are subsidizing government health care plans in foreign countries"

Ding ding ding! Winner!

Posted by: Anon a mouse at April 14, 2019 12:39 PM (6qErC)

32 I will actually belive the leftist when they talk about the high price of "Drugs" when they take a nice hard look at EpiPens. Epinephrine emergecy shots have increased in the last 10 years. 2007 price $100.00. 2016 $300~$600, and by the way they will expire 1 year from purchase.

Do not worry though CEO donates to the "Correct" political party.

Posted by: Picric at April 14, 2019 12:41 PM (62GnP)

33 Can we import Canadian pre-built shelving? Asking for a friend.

Posted by: Two Moons Over Endor at April 14, 2019 12:41 PM (VB3qu)

34 21 notsothoreau "... at what point do we consider the costs recouped?..."

i have been on a medication for the past year costing $400 a month, nearly $5,000 a year. my insurer recently recommended a generic @ $10 a month. why didn't they do that a year ago?

Posted by: musical jolly chimp at April 14, 2019 12:41 PM (Pg+x7)

35 The drug companies worked with Barky's minions on the ACA. I think there is some thing about insurance having to cover more prescriptions. Drug prices sky rocketed after the ACA was passed. So don't call them the good guys. They need Dr Ben and evil orange man to scare them a bit and to roll back the insane protective patents that somehow are letting them get away with charging $500 for insulin which is cheap to make and has been around a long time so shouldn't be under patent.

Ivermectin is wormer. Its what is in heartworm preventative for dogs and how I worm my horses and has been around for decades. So is 'river blindness' caused by a parasite?

Posted by: PaleRider is simply irredeemable at April 14, 2019 12:41 PM (UC0pf)

36 I can understand hesitation when dealing with Indian or Chinese companies. I feel like New Zealand and Australian pharmaceutical companies can turn out a quality product.
Posted by: Notsothoreau at April 14, 2019 12:37 PM (Lqy/e)

Israel too. See Teva Pharmaceuticals.

Posted by: Insomniac at April 14, 2019 12:41 PM (NWiLs)

37
Kim Jung Uno was just "re-elected?"

...


Xi and Putin called to congratulate him.

Serious about that.

Posted by: Ha at April 14, 2019 12:41 PM (MAstk)

38 I stopped defending corporations.

Politically, they are not in our side.

Posted by: Ha at April 14, 2019 12:42 PM (MAstk)

39 Damn autocorrect

Posted by: Ha at April 14, 2019 12:43 PM (MAstk)

40 "Why is a drug, that is manufactured by the same big pharma company in
the US, sold inside the US for $60 a pill, and sold outside the US for
$3 a pill" rickl

I don't know details ... but that is the general argument I'd heard ... the US gets to fund all the RD, then BigPharma makes bulk deals with other governments. But our government refuses to do that ... we have more quantity purchase power than any ... but our DC sellouts don't care, take the bribes.

Posted by: illiniwek at April 14, 2019 12:43 PM (Cus5s)

41 The effect of pharmaceuticals:


=====

Not complete without White Rabbit --

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RdoLcgxvf98

Posted by: mustbequantum at April 14, 2019 12:43 PM (MIKMs)

42 The drug companies worked with Barky's minions on the ACA"

Hey, let's have more government!

*sigh*

Posted by: Anon a mouse at April 14, 2019 12:43 PM (6qErC)

43 Politically, they are not in our side."

Never were, but now with even bigger government with more controls, well...

Posted by: Anon a mouse at April 14, 2019 12:46 PM (6qErC)

44 I feel like New Zealand

-
You wanna start trouble? Describe the attacks on those mosques as somebody did something.

Posted by: Anonosaurus Wrecks, Tyrannosaur Wrangler at April 14, 2019 12:46 PM (+y/Ru)

45 That's a very good question. Apparently the pharma companies negotiate prices with foreign governments who have socialized medicine, which leaves them able to charge whatever they can get away with inside the US.

This is not exactly a "free market". It sounds more like Americans are subsidizing government health care plans in foreign countries.
Posted by: rickl at April 14, 2019 12:38 PM (sdi6R)


That's exactly what happens. Foreign governments are essentially monopsonies; if you don't sell to them, at whatever price they dictate, you don't sell at all. Some countries (e.g., India) go even further: if you don't sell at their price, they'll abnegate your patent and allow home-grown manufacturers to make your product at will.

That's why drug prices are higher in the U.S. than elsewhere: sick Americans are basically paying top dollar so that Europeans, Canadians, and others can have cheap drugs by free-riding on us. Pharma has to recoup its investment in discovering and gaining regulatory approval for a new drug (typically a 10 year process), and to recoup the costs of failed drugs, and all of that in the remaining five to ten years of patent life.

Having said that, drug costs are a relatively small proportion (ca. 10%) of health care costs, even here.

Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara at April 14, 2019 12:46 PM (YqDXo)

46 Headline I saw this morning:

White House Braces for Full Mueller Report

Fuck these assholes.

Posted by: Bicentennialguy at April 14, 2019 12:47 PM (JcXHH)

47 Want to give dingle less tingle! You quick; want slow? Canadian dong tea!

Posted by: andycanuck at April 14, 2019 12:48 PM (Dh1wo)

48 BTW, I've never gotten duck at a pharmacy here. Maybe in Quebec but not here.

Posted by: andycanuck at April 14, 2019 12:49 PM (Dh1wo)

49 I took my uncle to the doc, doc asked if he was a wealthy man, could he afford an expensive drug. I said yes if it would help. He got a few treatments at $500 a pop or so, never noticed a difference.


An additional wrinkle, I spoke with uncle's cousin later (Indianapolis, Eli Lily) who told me his daughter had worked on the marketing of that drug. Good for them, but the drugs should at least work and cost the same in Canada.


They ended some of the bonuses to docs I think, for pushing a certain drug (free trip with 20 scripts, or whatever). But my nephew (a doctor) said they found even small things like a free lunch would influence the doctors' decisions.

Posted by: illiniwek at April 14, 2019 12:50 PM (Cus5s)

50 Headline I saw this morning:

White House Braces for Full Mueller Report

Fuck these assholes.

-
Maybe they've got their arms around their abdomens so they don't bust a gut laughing.

Posted by: Anonosaurus Wrecks, Tyrannosaur Wrangler at April 14, 2019 12:50 PM (+y/Ru)

51 I don't know details ... but that is the general argument I'd heard ... the US gets to fund all the RD, then BigPharma makes bulk deals with other governments. But our government refuses to do that ... we have more quantity purchase power than any ... but our DC sellouts don't care, take the bribes.

Posted by: illiniwek at April 14, 2019 12:43 PM (Cus5s)


Several reasons. One, it would destroy drug innovation. The US market is about half of the market for drugs worldwide.

Two, the government is not the only buyer of drugs here, unlike elsewhere. Foreign governments can get hard-nosed because they gain popularity at home by sticking it to America. See, e.g., the EU fining Google, banning GMO crops, etc.

Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara at April 14, 2019 12:51 PM (YqDXo)

52 And they come from New Zealand pharmacies.
------
Kiwis not canards!

Posted by: andycanuck at April 14, 2019 12:51 PM (Dh1wo)

53 40
I don't know details ... but that is the general argument I'd heard ... the US gets to fund all the RD, then BigPharma makes bulk deals with other governments. But our government refuses to do that ... we have more quantity purchase power than any ... but our DC sellouts don't care, take the bribes.
Posted by: illiniwek at April 14, 2019 12:43 PM (Cus5s)


The way I understand it is that the bulk deals with other governments are done because those governments control health care in their countries. If we don't have socialized medicine in the US, then how can the US government make bulk purchases (other than Medicare and Medicaid)?

It seems to me that the pharma corporations that make sweetheart deals with foreign socialist governments are behaving in much the same way as Google working with the Chinese government to censor the internet for the Chinese people.

Posted by: rickl at April 14, 2019 12:51 PM (sdi6R)

54 In a sane world HMOs and major med would be the standards for health insurance. HMOs of course already steer patients to the cheaper old drug that is 90% as effective which is plenty to control cholesterol or whatever for most people. With a major med policy and if hospitals and clinics had to publish price menus most patients would decide on their own to try the cheaper drug first.

I don't want socialized healthcare where death panels decide that no one needs to get a cancer or hep. drug that costs 200K or more. But to argue that current U.S. regs do not stack the deck to help drug companies over charge is dumb.

Posted by: PaleRider is simply irredeemable at April 14, 2019 12:52 PM (UC0pf)

55 I don't know details ... but that is the general argument I'd heard ... the US gets to fund all the RD, then BigPharma makes bulk deals with other governments.

As pointed out above, they don't really have a choice in this.

Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara at April 14, 2019 12:52 PM (YqDXo)

56 But to argue that current U.S. regs do not stack the deck to help drug companies over charge is dumb.
Posted by: PaleRider is simply irredeemable at April 14, 2019 12:52 PM (UC0pf)


Define "overcharge."

Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara at April 14, 2019 12:53 PM (YqDXo)

57 Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara at April 14, 2019 12:39 PM (YqDXo)

But in some cases they reset the patents, which is ridiculous.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at April 14, 2019 12:55 PM (wYseH)

58 34


Good question for a lawyer.

Posted by: Ha at April 14, 2019 12:55 PM (MAstk)

59 > Why is a drug, that is manufactured by the same big pharma company in the US, sold inside the US for $60 a pill, and sold outside the US for $3 a pill?

Because the manufacturing cost of the pill is $10 billion plus $2/pill.

The $10 billion has to come from somewhere.

If you insist on uniform prices worldwide, you're going to get closer to $60/pill everywhere, not $3.00.

Posted by: Rodrigo Borgia at April 14, 2019 12:56 PM (0OWcv)

60 I had my pulmonologist prescribe a nasal spray that actually worked after using two that didn't. When we got new insurance at work, as we do every year since Obamacare, they made me go back to the ineffective one.

High drug prices just lead to insurance companies practicing medicine.

Posted by: Notsothoreau at April 14, 2019 12:56 PM (Lqy/e)

61 they found even small things like a free lunch would influence the doctors' decisions.

Posted by: illiniwek at April 14, 2019 12:50 PM (Cus5s)

Fine...but hold our legislators to the same standard.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at April 14, 2019 12:56 PM (wYseH)

62 It seems to me that the pharma corporations that make sweetheart deals with foreign socialist governments are behaving in much the same way as Google working with the Chinese government to censor the internet for the Chinese people.
Posted by: rickl at April 14, 2019 12:51 PM (sdi6R)


Foreign government: "We'd like to buy your drug. We'll buy it on a cost-plus basis. Take it or leave it."

Pharma: "But ... but ... "

Foreign government: "If you don't take the deal we're offering, we'll license our own manufacturers to make it here, and you'll get nothing."

Pharma: "Sigh. OK."

Bear in mind that FDA drug master files are public information, and they describe in excruciating detail exactly how to make and test a drug. Making a drug is easy once you know how; figuring out which compound to make, and how to make it, and getting it approved, THOSE are the hard parts.

It's much like pirating a movie. What does it cost to make a movie? What does it cost to burn a copy of a movie to a DVD?

Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara at April 14, 2019 12:57 PM (YqDXo)

63 But my nephew (a doctor) said they found even small things like a free lunch would influence the doctors' decisions.
--------
Or Penny and/or Bernadette giving them blowjobs??

Posted by: andycanuck at April 14, 2019 12:58 PM (Dh1wo)

64 > It's much like pirating a movie. What does it cost to make a movie? What does it cost to burn a copy of a movie to a DVD?

Yes, almost exactly the same.

Posted by: Rodrigo Borgia at April 14, 2019 12:58 PM (0OWcv)

65 But in some cases they reset the patents, which is ridiculous.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at April 14, 2019 12:55 PM (wYseH)


What do you mean by "reset?" I don't understand.

Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara at April 14, 2019 12:58 PM (YqDXo)

66 But to argue that current U.S. regs do not stack the deck to help drug companies over charge is dumb.

Posted by: PaleRider is simply irredeemable at April 14, 2019 12:52 PM (UC0pf)

Economics tells us that excess profits attract competition. So if they were overcharging there would be additional entries into the business, and that's not happening.

The issue is the distortion of the free market.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at April 14, 2019 12:59 PM (wYseH)

67 This is one of those markets where I guess I'm not for "Big Business", mostly because the rest of the world free loads off us.

So Americans have to pay the crazy high prices so the rest of the globe gets the cheap, subsidized drugs.

There's some crazy examples too, one off the top of my head, like a scorpion venom antidote costing $100 in Mexico, $12,000 in US. Same drug, same company.

If you allowed reimportation, I think prices would come down across the board. So prices would go up globally (closer to the actual costs) but down for Americans.

Just because Big Business wants something doesn't mean it's "conservative".

Posted by: Blago at April 14, 2019 01:00 PM (UfkIY)

68 "Why is a drug, that is manufactured by the same big pharma company in the US, sold inside the US for $60 a pill, and sold outside the US for $3 a pill" rickl

Same reason we pick up the tab for defense of Europe and Canada, while they do bupkis: because we don't play hard-ball with them, so they chisel us.

It's just that simple.

Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara at April 14, 2019 01:00 PM (YqDXo)

69 > If you allowed reimportation, I think prices would come down across the board.

I think you're wrong. They would go way, way up in the third world (or the third world would start pirating them outright). The prices would not go down here to any significant degree.


Posted by: Rodrigo Borgia at April 14, 2019 01:01 PM (0OWcv)

70 34 21 notsothoreau "... at what point do we consider the costs recouped?..."

i have been on a medication for the past year costing $400 a month, nearly $5,000 a year. my insurer recently recommended a generic @ $10 a month. why didn't they do that a year ago?
Posted by: musical jolly chimp at April 14, 2019 12:41 PM (Pg+x7)

Because the drug rep for the name brand had big tits and an ass you could bounce a quarter off of.

Posted by: Insomniac at April 14, 2019 01:01 PM (NWiLs)

71 I have a dozen ideas for this problem, most which I can't articulate well or are too long. But I would like them not to extend the initial patents.

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at April 14, 2019 01:01 PM (r+sAi)

72 8 Good morning CBD,

Why is a drug, that is manufactured by the same big pharma company in the US, sold inside the US for $60 a pill, and sold outside the US for $3 a pill?

I'll hang up and listen.
Posted by: rickb223 at April 14, 2019 12:25 PM (dDUXP)

---

In the case of Canada--
Drugs are sold in Canada at a price set by the Canadian government -- health insurance is a function of government there. The Canadian govt. drives a hard bargain and these are non-market prices -- we'll never know the market prices in Canada because they don't exist. If the drugs were not already produced and sold in the US there would be no financial reason whatsoever for US drug companies to sell drugs there, or develop them in the first place. The socialist Canadian government is engaged in parasitism of a free market economy (ours) here. The people who advocate that we should re-import drugs from Canada or that prices there are some kind of model or argument have no idea what they're talking about. It's already marginal profit for the US companies to sell there and if they have to take any more shit it would be perfectly reasonable for them to quit doing it.

Why does Canada, for example, bus patients to the US for MRIs? Because their penny-pinching healthcare system means there are almost no machines in Canada compared to here. Why have cancer patients there been put on treatment waiting lists for over a year? Same reason.

In other countries such as the Third World ones, drugs are often counterfeited. I've seen what appear to be doctor's free samples of US drugs being sold over the counter in China; potent stuff, no prescription required.

Posted by: Semi-Literate Thug at April 14, 2019 01:02 PM (t5m5e)

73 What do you mean by "reset?" I don't understand.

Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara at April 14, 2019 12:58 PM (YqDXo)

The new formulation receives additional market protection even though the drug is essentially unchanged. Which makes less sense than protecting a genuinely new drug.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at April 14, 2019 01:02 PM (wYseH)

74 Jay do you think the epi-pens became 3-6 times more expensive to produce when ACA was passed. Are you aware that the FDA restricts anyone but the one company that holds that old patent from making any similar product.

Why docs and local pharmacies don't steer people towards "look you can get this vial of epinephrine for $xx. and a few .99 cent syringes and needles and give yourself a shot vs using the anyone can do this pen that costs 30 times as much is a question. My guess is the assumption that its the 3rd party payers and malpractice fears so that a doc does not want to recommend something that could have user error even if the patient is begging that they can't afford the price of the monopoly FDA protected giant drug companies pushed product.

Posted by: PaleRider is simply irredeemable at April 14, 2019 01:02 PM (UC0pf)

75 Ivermectin is the most effective wormer ever. The parasites can develop no immunity to it so no need for rotating your wormers. It is also effective as a spot on wormer.
Ivermec has been a boon to the livestock industry.

Posted by: Ben Had at April 14, 2019 01:02 PM (V6Q2+)

76 Prescriptions are expensive because some people did something.

Posted by: Omar at April 14, 2019 01:03 PM (MAstk)

77 High drug prices just lead to insurance companies practicing medicine.
Posted by: Notsothoreau at April 14, 2019 12:56 PM (Lqy/e)

They've been doing that since at least the dawn of the HMO.

Posted by: Insomniac at April 14, 2019 01:03 PM (NWiLs)

78 Ivermectin is wormer. Its what is in heartworm preventative for dogs and how I worm my horses and has been around for decades. So is 'river blindness' caused by a parasite?
Posted by: PaleRider is simply irredeemable at April 14, 2019 12:41 PM (UC0pf)

I was going to make that point, too. My local veterinarian does livestock, and Ivermectin is sold for use on cattle in vast quantities.

Posted by: Alberta Oil Peon at April 14, 2019 01:03 PM (TfwlC)

79 Same reason we pick up the tab for defense of Europe and Canada, while they do bupkis: because we don't play hard-ball with them, so they chisel us.

It's just that simple.
Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara

_____________

And our "American" pharma corporations push this. Our health market is like some corporatist dream for health care companies.

Even prisons are forced by law to buy like $100k hepatitis treatments for inmates. Then you have medicare, medicaid, etc.

Our health care market is not a free market. It's basically designed to just line the pockets of health care companies which is why costs are out of control.

Posted by: Blago at April 14, 2019 01:04 PM (UfkIY)

80 Economics tells us that excess profits attract competition. So if they were overcharging there would be additional entries into the business, and that's not happening.

This.

Consider the case of vaccines. The government now indemnifies vaccine manufacturers against liability in lawsuits. Why?

Because pharma was basically making vaccines as a public service. They more or less break-even on vaccines. But when they faced a flurry of liability litigation, pharma was getting out of the vaccine business entirely, as it was pure downside risk.

The government stepped in to indemnify pharma so they would continue to make vaccines.

Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara at April 14, 2019 01:04 PM (YqDXo)

81 "If we don't have socialized medicine in the US, then how can the US
government make bulk purchases (other than Medicare and Medicaid)?"

Medicare/Medicaid is the problem, as far as our runaway debt goes. They could collectively change the price structure, I would think, to match Canada. I don't believe altruism about wanting to support RD is the reason, imo it is the BigPharma lobby.


The miracle drugs are great ... a cancer cure can cost a million, at least it is largely American Made, and hopefully the profits circulate in the US. It's only money ... making the world healthier ... fake money anyway. heh.

Posted by: illiniwek at April 14, 2019 01:06 PM (Cus5s)

82 Economics tells us that excess profits attract competition. So if they were overcharging there would be additional entries into the business, and that's not happening.

The issue is the distortion of the free market.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at April 14, 2019 12:59 PM (wYseH)

Except that you have regulatory capture by the existing manufacturers, making the drug business into a closed club.

Posted by: Alberta Oil Peon at April 14, 2019 01:07 PM (TfwlC)

83 Even "Made in America" is no sigh of a safe drug, as the largest manufacturer of ingredients used worldwide in drugs is China

Didn't realize it but the valsartan recalled was all made in China.

Posted by: NOT THAT GUY at April 14, 2019 01:07 PM (DIyMv)

84 I think you're wrong. They would go way, way up in the third world (or the third world would start pirating them outright). The prices would not go down here to any significant degree.


Posted by: Rodrigo Borgia

_________________

Someone is subsidizing the costs and we're the only country that really allows pricing like this. So we're paying for the 3rd world to get cheap drugs. I really don't think it could get any worse for us.

But using a classic libertarian argument, I thought free trade was the most important thing ever. Why not allow Americans to "import" drugs if they are cheaper?

Posted by: Blago at April 14, 2019 01:07 PM (UfkIY)

85 How many of these countries that play hardball with our drug companies get foreign aid from us?
Shut that spigot off.

Do they sell their products in our country?
Helloooo hammertime tarriffs.

This ain't rocket science with a slide rule

Put. America. First.

They want to hate the most charitable nation on the planet no matter what we do?
Fine.
Give em a reason.

Posted by: teej at April 14, 2019 01:08 PM (1XIkG)

86 67 This is one of those markets where I guess I'm not for "Big Business", mostly because the rest of the world free loads off us.

So Americans have to pay the crazy high prices so the rest of the globe gets the cheap, subsidized drugs.

There's some crazy examples too, one off the top of my head, like a scorpion venom antidote costing $100 in Mexico, $12,000 in US. Same drug, same company.

If you allowed reimportation, I think prices would come down across the board. So prices would go up globally (closer to the actual costs) but down for Americans.

Just because Big Business wants something doesn't mean it's "conservative".
Posted by: Blago at April 14, 2019 01:00 PM (UfkIY)



You got it! This is exactly the point.

The pharma corporations are enabling and subsidizing socialism in other countries while American drug consumers are often driven into bankruptcy.

It's about time that foreign consumers start paying their fair share of the R&D cost instead of Americans having to shoulder it all.

Posted by: rickl at April 14, 2019 01:08 PM (sdi6R)

87 Just look up "Drugs made in China". It's frightening.

Posted by: NOT THAT GUY at April 14, 2019 01:09 PM (DIyMv)

88 And of course Jay puts up @68 while I'm typing after reading the last comment at the time, @67.

Posted by: teej at April 14, 2019 01:10 PM (1XIkG)

89 Jay do you think the epi-pens became 3-6 times more expensive to produce when ACA was passed. Are you aware that the FDA restricts anyone but the one company that holds that old patent from making any similar product.

No idea why that happened. And to be fair, some companies have gouged on prices by dramatically raising them for no economic reason.

Having said that, the FDA does not restrict anyone from making a similar product once the patent expires (usually 5-10 years after approval; the patent clock runs for 20 years from the date of first filing, i.e., the first hint of an idea). Anyone can challenge patent rights at the FDA through what is called a Paragraph IV filing. Teva (Israel) and a number of Indian companies do this routinely.

Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara at April 14, 2019 01:11 PM (YqDXo)

90 You know part of why countries like Canada can charge so little for drugs?

Because in trade deals with the US they make it part of law that the companies cannot sell their products for profit, they basically undercut the drug companies through trade negotiations to keep costs low for their state health care system.

Guess who gets to pay for the difference?

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at April 14, 2019 01:11 PM (39g3+)

91 Jay do you think the epi-pens became 3-6 times more expensive to produce when ACA was passed. Are you aware that the FDA restricts anyone but the one company that holds that old patent from making any similar product.

No. Not because of ADA.
Yes. FDA restricts. Ask why.
Guess who is CEO of the company? Some congressman's daughter. Serious shady shit going on.

We covered it here last year.

Posted by: rickb223 at April 14, 2019 01:12 PM (dDUXP)

92 Camera Hogg has been out of the spotlight to long it seems
Tweets 6:32 Apr 13
"Can we take for a moment about how triggering the video
trump posted for the thousands of people who lost someone
they knew on 9/11?"

Posted by: Skip at April 14, 2019 01:12 PM (BbGew)

93 It's about time that foreign consumers start paying their fair share of the R&D cost instead of Americans having to shoulder it all.
Posted by: rickl at April 14, 2019 01:08 PM (sdi6R)


This.

The Donald needs to go to work on this, in much the same fashion he went to work on NATO, and for the same reason.

Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara at April 14, 2019 01:12 PM (YqDXo)

94 One of the other main theories is that if we don't subsidize the socialist countries pharm, then those countries will just reverse engineer the drugs. One, I would like to test that, and two is why we need a tough trade policy, and three is why I like Trump in this area.

I do have an inkling though that US drug prices would not drop even if socialist govts paid more for their US drugs.

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at April 14, 2019 01:12 PM (r+sAi)

95 Remember when the FDA head weasel says releasing this new dru will save 10,000 lives in the next year mean that he killed 50,000 for not releasing the drugs 5 years ago when they had proof it was safe and effective.

Posted by: rhennigantx at April 14, 2019 01:13 PM (JFO2v)

96 We covered it here last year.
-----
Obama buddies I recall too.

Posted by: andycanuck at April 14, 2019 01:14 PM (Dh1wo)

97 Having said that, the FDA does not restrict anyone
from making a similar product once the patent expires (usually 5-10
years after approval; the patent clock runs for 20 years from the date
of first filing, i.e., the first hint of an idea).

Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara at April 14, 2019 01:11 PM (YqDXo)

Exactly. Nothing prevents people who suffer from peanut or bee (or whatever) allergies from starting a company to make cheap epi-pens.

But they get more attention bitching about it and getting their congressmen involved for some TV time.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at April 14, 2019 01:15 PM (wYseH)

98 > Someone is subsidizing the costs and we're the only country that really allows pricing like this. So we're paying for the 3rd world to get cheap drugs.

Not really.

You are assuming that if it weren't for the "subsidy", the drugs would be sold for the same price in the third world that they are here, when in fact they just wouldn't be sold there at all (or would be pirated).

Posted by: Rodrigo Borgia at April 14, 2019 01:15 PM (0OWcv)

99 Big Pharama is not our friend. They actually were a big booster to pass ObamaCare, once they made sure to get their carve out, they were all for "free" healthcare.

They are creating trillions of extra costs for things like Medicare/ACA/Medicaid, state health care plans, etc.

I honestly think out of control drug prices are an issue that could be what finally puts America on a true Single Payer system.

I would love it if every market were as simple as something like smartphones, but in this case, a "pro-business" pharma stance could destroy free market health care in our country.

Letting consumers/companies import drugs is a pretty easy "relief valve" to this phenomenon.

Posted by: Blago at April 14, 2019 01:17 PM (UfkIY)

100 I honestly think out of control drug prices are an issue that could be what finally puts America on a true Single Payer system.

Posted by: Blago at April 14, 2019 01:17 PM (UfkIY)

Take a look at procedure prices if you really want to be shocked.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at April 14, 2019 01:18 PM (wYseH)

101 94 One of the other main theories is that if we don't subsidize the socialist countries pharm, then those countries will just reverse engineer the drugs. One, I would like to test that, and two is why we need a tough trade policy, and three is why I like Trump in this area.
Posted by: Guy Mohawk at April 14, 2019 01:12 PM (r+sAi)


I like teej's #85 comment. If foreign countries start pirating US-developed drugs, cut off their foreign aid.


I do have an inkling though that US drug prices would not drop even if socialist govts paid more for their US drugs.

I think reimportation would have a salutary effect in that respect.

Posted by: rickl at April 14, 2019 01:20 PM (sdi6R)

102 I don't believe altruism about wanting to support RD is the reason, imo it is the BigPharma lobby.

Pharma research is enormously expensive. There are literally thousands of Ph.D.s in everything from chemistry to pharmacology to toxicology to you name it involved.

Fun fact: most pharma researchers spend their entire careers without ever coming up with a drug that makes it to market. And not for want of trying.

Re expense, consider the case of torceptapib, which Pfizer thought would be a blockbuster much like Lipitor, and the stock market agreed.

It failed in phase III clinical trials, where a statistically significant increase in mortality was observed. End of torceptapib. Ten years and $800 million down the drain. Plus Pfizer stock got clobbered too, IIRC.

Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara at April 14, 2019 01:20 PM (YqDXo)

103 River blindness is a parasitic disease. The little buggers multiply in the aqueous humour, which is why the sufferer goes blind.

Posted by: Captain Obvious at April 14, 2019 01:21 PM (IFKOp)

104 test

Posted by: Gref at April 14, 2019 01:21 PM (AMIL/)

105 You are assuming that if it weren't for the "subsidy", the drugs would be sold for the same price in the third world that they are here, when in fact they just wouldn't be sold there at all (or would be pirated).

Posted by: Rodrigo Borgia

_______________

No, but if there was more competition in the American markets, those profits would have to be made elsewhere.

So if Americans can import a $100 drug that Mexicans only pay $14,000 for, common sense tells you the $100 price is more likely to go up in price because less of the $14,000 drugs will be sold.

This isn't really a "debate" that the US is subsidizing the global market. The drug companies are fine with the arrangement because they can make their real profits off the American market.

Posted by: Blago at April 14, 2019 01:21 PM (UfkIY)

106 94 One of the other main theories is that if we don't subsidize the socialist countries pharm, then those countries will just reverse engineer the drugs.

No need. The FDA maintains a DMF (drug master file) on each approved drug that describes in mind-numbing detail exactly how to make it.

Once the drug goes off patent, generic companies just avail themselves of the DMF and start cranking out the stuff. The only approval they need from the FDA is inspection of their plant, and analysis of their product.

Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara at April 14, 2019 01:23 PM (YqDXo)

107 104 test


Spelling is correct, but that's about it. Failure to capitalize, lack of punctuation, utterly devoid of originality, and not on topic.

D

Posted by: Bandersnatch at April 14, 2019 01:23 PM (fuK7c)

108 I do have an inkling though that US drug prices would not drop even if socialist govts paid more for their US drugs.

I agree, drug companies are not blameless here. They charge as absolutely much as they possibly can get away with to people who are in desperate need and possibly even dying without the drugs.

Conservatives have a stupid tendency to trust big business beyond its trustworthiness, like leftists have a stupid tendency to trust government. You can't trust either one.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at April 14, 2019 01:24 PM (39g3+)

109 In recent decades pharma companies have paid for approximately 60 % of domestic drug RnD costs.

Posted by: Undocumented at April 14, 2019 01:24 PM (uz/Pv)

110 Yeah Whatever. I have no ideological ties to the drug companies. I remember quite distinctly they convinced George H w Bush to ban CFC's in inhalers as part of a Treaty (but they didn't need to be included), thereby allowing the drug companies to create NEW patents for the same drug with a new propellants. Propellants (corn based) btw that many were allergic to, but now had to pay many times more for. Flovent/combivent could now cost you hundreds of dollars per inhalers. That isn't innovation, its rent seeking of the highest order, on the backs of those who need those drugs to breathe.

Posted by: Quilp at April 14, 2019 01:25 PM (Bf3hj)

111
The new formulation receives additional market protection even though the drug is essentially unchanged. Which makes less sense than protecting a genuinely new drug.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at April 14, 2019 01:02 PM (wYseH)


Sorry, if the new formulation allows the patient to take a drug once a day instead of four times a day, that's a big deal.

Posted by: Hadrian the Seventh at April 14, 2019 01:25 PM (LsBY9)

112 The drug companies are fine with the arrangement because they can make their real profits off the American market.

Posted by: Blago at April 14, 2019 01:21 PM (UfkIY)

And market distortion because of government interference is what the real danger is. When regulatory games rather than markets are what drive profits, we miss out on lots of stuff.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at April 14, 2019 01:25 PM (wYseH)

113 The drug companies are fine with the arrangement because they can make their real profits off the American market.
Posted by: Blago at April 14, 2019 01:21 PM (UfkIY)


Trust me, they're not fine with it. They'd love to charge foreign governments more, but simply cannot do that.

Pharma deals typically center on the American market; other countries get thrown into deals more or less as an afterthought because pharma doesn't make much money there. The American market alone is about 50% of the world market, IIRC.

Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara at April 14, 2019 01:26 PM (YqDXo)

114 "and not on topic."

In fairness, it was after comment 100.
Would need a ruling from the style guide judges.

Posted by: teej at April 14, 2019 01:26 PM (1XIkG)

115 97
Nothing prevents people who suffer from peanut or bee (or whatever) allergies from starting a company to make cheap epi-pens.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at April 14, 2019 01:15 PM (wYseH)


Starting a new pharmaceutical company is "nothing"? The FDA might have something to say about that.

That sounds an awful lot like Google, Facebook, and Twitter saying, "Start your own company if you don't like our censorship."

Posted by: rickl at April 14, 2019 01:28 PM (sdi6R)

116 The new formulation receives additional market protection even though the drug is essentially unchanged. Which makes less sense than protecting a genuinely new drug.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at April 14, 2019 01:02 PM (wYseH)


People say that, but the obvious response is "buy the generic drug then." The patent only covers the new formulation of the drug, not the API itself. If the new formulation isn't worth the expense, don't buy it.

Simple, really.

Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara at April 14, 2019 01:28 PM (YqDXo)

117 I do have an inkling though that US drug prices would not drop even if socialist govts paid more for their US drugs.

________________________________

Maybe, but maybe not.

But can we at least agree that something is very wrong when an identical drug has something like a 14,000% price increase based on where it's sold a few miles over a border? And it's ALWAYS the American consumer that is paying this increased price?

At the very least, some people would get some pricing relief if this was opened up. Might as well be some Americans, even if it's not every American.

Posted by: Blago at April 14, 2019 01:28 PM (UfkIY)

118 Big Pharama is not our friend. They actually were a big booster to pass ObamaCare, once they made sure to get their carve out, they were all for "free" healthcare.

Sure, it was Fascist economics: the biggest, most powerful companies backed this idea because they knew they'd be helping write the law and regulations, so they could carve themselves a wonderful deal. What happens to the people? Who gives a damn, they could get RICH baby.

It was a hellish combination of the worst of private and public forces.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at April 14, 2019 01:29 PM (39g3+)

119 No. Not because of ADA.
Yes. FDA restricts. Ask why.
Guess who is CEO of the company? Some congressman's daughter. Serious shady shit going on.

We covered it here last year.
Posted by: rickb223 at April 14, 2019 01:12 PM (dDUXP)

Yes, the Epi-Pen case is sheer naked corruption, which is the end state of regulatory capture.

Posted by: Alberta Oil Peon at April 14, 2019 01:30 PM (TfwlC)

120 Yes, the profit motive does motivate, but it is folly to claim it is the largest motivator or that it is extremely necessary outside the modern clown world.

The great Edward Jenner developed the first SmallPox Vaccine without any profit motive, he did it for the glory of God King and Country.

Sir Issac Newton also did not need a massive profit motive to produce great things benefiting all mankind.

Plato, Aristotle, and many other extremely great minds were also motivated by means other than the typical profit motivates of a capitalists.

And again, I am not denying that profit motivates. I 100% agree that it does motivate, and very much so. Nor am I advocating for socialism. I believe Commies, Bolsheviks, Mensheviks, Trotskyists, Maoists, and the rest of the Red Scum should be given one way helicopter rides.

Instead, I am saying that it is folly to think that personal profit is the ONLY way to motivate a great Civilization and advance a nation.

Today's massive profit motive is needed because of the insane regulatory hurdles. Regulatory hurdles which serve primarily to employ Democrats. Eliminate that first!

Posted by: A Gentleman at April 14, 2019 01:31 PM (vzaDL)

121 thereby allowing the drug companies to create NEW patents for the same drug with a new propellants.

I say again: the "new" patent does not cover the old drug. It covers the combination of the old drug with the new propellant.

Find a different new propellant, and a competitor can patent and sell that (once the FDA approves).

Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara at April 14, 2019 01:33 PM (YqDXo)

122 Big pharma isn't your friend, nor your enemy
Like Coke they want to make money.

Posted by: Skip at April 14, 2019 01:33 PM (BbGew)

123 Instead, I am saying that it is folly to think that personal profit is the ONLY way to motivate a great Civilization and advance a nation.

I agree, profit is a powerful motivation, but not the exclusive one. It may not even be the most powerful. At some level, I think most of the people working in the pharmaceutical industry (at least at the work level, not the admin level) are doing it because they want to help people.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at April 14, 2019 01:34 PM (39g3+)

124 Sir Issac Newton also did not need a massive profit motive to produce great things benefiting all mankind.

Plato, Aristotle, and many other extremely great minds were also motivated by means other than the typical profit motivates of a capitalists.


What product did Newton, Plato, or Aristotle produce? I missed that.

Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara at April 14, 2019 01:34 PM (YqDXo)

125 >>>122 Big pharma isn't your friend, nor your enemy
Like Coke they want to make money.
Posted by: Skip at April 14, 2019 01:33 PM (BbGew)
________
Coke is your enemy. They are the Dibetus

Posted by: Wilford Brimley at April 14, 2019 01:35 PM (vzaDL)

126 PILLS HERE, EH!

Posted by: Canadian Left 4 Dead at April 14, 2019 01:35 PM (VB3qu)

127 In all things, you don't get what is fair, you get what you negotiate.
If you forfeit the negotiations, what you get sucks.
This is why/how we got PDJT.

Posted by: navybrat, sometime commentater at April 14, 2019 01:35 PM (w7KSn)

128 I agree, profit is a powerful motivation, but not the exclusive one. It may not even be the most powerful. At some level, I think most of the people working in the pharmaceutical industry (at least at the work level, not the admin level) are doing it because they want to help people.
Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at April 14, 2019 01:34 PM (39g3+)


Sort of, but not really. As mentioned above, relatively few scientists in pharma ever work on a drug that gains approval, so the altruistic connection is pretty weak.

Most of them primarily enjoy doing research, and the outside chance that they may find something worthwhile.

Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara at April 14, 2019 01:37 PM (YqDXo)

129 >>>124

What product did Newton, Plato, or Aristotle produce? I missed that.
Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara at April 14, 2019 01:34 PM (YqDXo)

____________
Just ignore me and focus on the more famous names huh?

SmallPox isn't extinct ya know. There's samples out there and I know where to find them.

Posted by: Zombie Edward Jenner at April 14, 2019 01:37 PM (3ELEd)

130 If you like your back bacon, you can keep your back bacon!

Posted by: Baracky O'Cracky at April 14, 2019 01:38 PM (EgshT)

131 I also don't really buy into the idea that if Big Pharma can't get it's way, the streets will be lined with dead people.

If some $50,000 HIV pill that works 2% better doesn't get developed, I think we'll be okay.

There's plenty of room for drug companies to make money curing diseases without this sort of gouging of Americans.

We weren't meant to live to be a 100 anyway and most of our real health problems are self-inflicted.

Most doctors I know think many of these "wonder" drugs are the equivalent of demanding a Rolex when a Timex tells time just as well.

Posted by: Blago at April 14, 2019 01:38 PM (UfkIY)

132
What product did Newton, Plato, or Aristotle produce? I missed that.
Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara at April 14, 2019 01:34 PM (YqDXo)

--------

Knowledge. Pert near always a tax on material production efforts.

Posted by: Undocumented at April 14, 2019 01:38 PM (uz/Pv)

133 But can we at least agree that something is very wrong when an identical drug has something like a 14,000% price increase based on where it's sold a few miles over a border?

Imagine the howling from the Left if pharma charged Third World countries at the same rate they charge here. There'd be Sally Struthers waddling around in front of some mud huts in Africa bleating about rapacious companies profiting from the poor.

Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara at April 14, 2019 01:40 PM (YqDXo)

134 I saw Sheer Naked Corruption open for Bare Naked Ladies at the Ontario Arena in '97. In the altogether quite a raw show.

Posted by: Insomniac at April 14, 2019 01:40 PM (NWiLs)

135 Knowledge. Pert near always a tax on material production efforts.
Posted by: Undocumented at April 14, 2019 01:38 PM (uz/Pv)


Knowledge isn't a product in the sense we're using here.

Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara at April 14, 2019 01:41 PM (YqDXo)

136 >>> >>>124

What product did Newton, Plato, or Aristotle produce? I missed that.
Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara at April 14, 2019 01:34 PM (YqDXo)

____________
I produced Alexander the Great at the behest of Phillip II of Macedonia.

Your ass and the rest of the world would be speaking Persian if not for me.

Posted by: Zombie Aristotle at April 14, 2019 01:41 PM (3ELEd)

137 If some $50,000 HIV pill that works 2% better doesn't get developed, I think we'll be okay.

Then use the one that works 98% as well, and save the difference.

Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara at April 14, 2019 01:42 PM (YqDXo)

138 There'd be Sally Struthers waddling around in front of some mud huts in Africa bleating about rapacious companies profiting from the poor.
Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara at April 14, 2019 01:40 PM (YqDXo)

----------

For just $1000 a day you can support a child in Shitholia. Call now.

Posted by: Undocumented at April 14, 2019 01:42 PM (uz/Pv)

139 What product did Newton, Plato, or Aristotle produce? I missed that.

Because the only things that count are physical objects?

Sort of, but not really. As mentioned above, relatively few scientists in pharma ever work on a drug that gains approval, so the altruistic connection is pretty weak.

Well that would be significant if I'd said that was their ONLY motivation or even their PRIMARY one, but since I didn't....

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at April 14, 2019 01:42 PM (39g3+)

140 Lindsey Graham to introduce immigration legislation, calls current laws 'insane'

Posted by: Ha at April 14, 2019 01:43 PM (MAstk)

141 Because the only things that count are physical objects?

Of course not. But we're talking about economic products here, not ideas.

Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara at April 14, 2019 01:44 PM (YqDXo)

142
Knowledge isn't a product in the sense we're using here.
Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara at April 14, 2019 01:41 PM (YqDXo)


----------
Perhaps it should be.

Posted by: Undocumented at April 14, 2019 01:44 PM (uz/Pv)

143 >>>There'd be Sally Struthers waddling around in front of some mud huts in Africa bleating about rapacious companies profiting from the poor.
Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara at April 14, 2019 01:40 PM (YqDXo)
_________
Here in death, I care even less for the disgusting barbarian hordes than I did in life.

Posted by: Zombie Aristotle at April 14, 2019 01:44 PM (3ELEd)

144 Yeah we really want Chinese produced drugs on the US market. What could go wrong?

Remember the tainted dog food sold in the US made in the PRC?

How about the lethal drywall? Also made in the PRC.

Pass. Unless every Democrat in Congress wants to be the test subjects, then let's try it out and see what happens.

Posted by: Anna Puma at April 14, 2019 01:44 PM (5UVOn)

145 "It really is a perfect government program. It drives up the cost of the products produced, while other parts of the government are conspiring to drive down the price charged by the producer."

This is because we live in a interest/usury based economic system. As anyone that has studied the history of booms and busts knows, a country that has been shackled with this inevitably destructive economic system has to keep borrowing money into existence, be it paper or ones and zeros. The traitors in government all eventually come to the conclusion that to maintain their cush job at the trough, they have to approve policies that spend more money. If they don't, the treadmill stops and the masses start looking for a scapegoat. Pharmaceuticals offers a double dip method for spending money. Driving up the costs of products produced and subsidizing the slaves that can't afford them. They look at that as a win-win situation. Keep the treadmill running and keep my head on my shoulders.

Posted by: Anonymous White Male at April 14, 2019 01:44 PM (3sjI6)

146 Instead of threatening immigrant families and the cities that welcome them, this president should spend a little more time learning from cities like Seattle.

"threatening" clearly nothing but a trigger word to stimulate the emotion of fear from a menacing source.

"immigrant families" - "MS-13, drug smugglers and human traffickers" don't have the same messaging effect.

"cities that welcome them" - Obviously a trigger phrase to get buy-in from virtue signalers. If the Sanctuary Cities that are so welcoming were so open to these "immigrant families" then how exactly is that "threatening"? Obviously this phrase is supposed to be taken completely isolated from the marketing of these same cities.

"learning from cities like Seattle". They don't really mean that literally, they want to connect the emotions of "open and welcoming" and "immigrant families" to the intended virtue signalling of a superior value, moral and ethical system (which Seattle completely lacks). Why else should others learn?

In reality, we have learned: Seattle pisses away over a billion dollars annually to cultivate and grow its drug addict and criminal communities. Because Seattle is "open and welcoming" to drug addicts, criminals and the lazy.

But don't threaten to send anybody there.

Posted by: Blue Bird of F'ing Joy at April 14, 2019 01:44 PM (lD3vL)

147 Chinese make best drugs. Antifreeze in Viagra perfectly safe. You Go Now!

Posted by: Elliot at April 14, 2019 01:44 PM (RM42S)

148 Your ass and the rest of the world would be speaking Persian if not for me.
Posted by: Zombie Aristotle


Yeah but you didn't make a THING so you are worthless.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at April 14, 2019 01:45 PM (39g3+)

149 a few years ago there was discussion here about some biotech blog ... the blog was for real scientists but was a useful resource. It shot down a few whacky ideas ... but I lost track of the blog in one of the windows updates that just shut down my computer (still).


anyone recall that blog? I think it came up when he kinda shot down some list of GMO fake science fears.

Posted by: illiniwek at April 14, 2019 01:45 PM (Cus5s)

150 One pizza for the chirruns, five pizzas for me!

Posted by: Sally Struthers at April 14, 2019 01:45 PM (EgshT)

151 @ 120 - A Gentleman

And while you were putting that up, my thoughts...

Like every other problem on this planet, this is a result of living in a fallen world.

Yes, the workman is worthy of remuneration for his labor.
And yes, businessmen should profit off of taking risks.

It is the greatest system ever devised.
But still man made and so is corrupted by the sinful nature of all of us.

God
Country
Family
Friends
Others
Self

The toughest credo to lu be by and I call as short of it as anyone.

None of this will be "fixed" until The Big Guy flips off the lights for a bit, then lights up the heavens with His glorious return.

It will get much, MUCH worse before that happens.

Even so, come quickly Lord.

Posted by: teej at April 14, 2019 01:46 PM (1XIkG)

152 I know some people that did some things.

Posted by: Omar at April 14, 2019 01:46 PM (MAstk)

153 OT: Tiger has a tap in birdie in front of him. All he has to do is not fuck up two holes and it's fifteen Majors.

Posted by: Bandersnatch at April 14, 2019 01:47 PM (fuK7c)

154 Yeah but you didn't make a THING so you are worthless.
Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at April 14, 2019 01:45 PM (39g3+)


You're being silly now. We're talking about making products that you can sell. It's an economic and financial debate on how the pharmaceutical market should be structured.

Nothing to do with Aristotle, Plato, or Newton. Zip.

Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara at April 14, 2019 01:48 PM (YqDXo)

155 Chinese make best drugs. Antifreeze in Viagra perfectly safe. You Go Now!

------------

They make some great CBD oil for vaping. The heavy metals go great with hard-edged, aggressive music.

Posted by: Undocumented at April 14, 2019 01:48 PM (uz/Pv)

156 If some $50,000 HIV pill that works 2% better doesn't get developed, I think we'll be okay.

Then use the one that works 98% as well, and save the difference.
Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara

____________

If someone "else" is paying for it (which is how most American healthcare is positioned) everyone demands the Rolex instead of the Timex. And we collectively all end up paying trillions extra for it.

If everyone paid for every drug and treatment out of their own pocket, 99% of this would be solved over night and costs would be contained. But that's not health care will ever work.

Posted by: Blago at April 14, 2019 01:48 PM (UfkIY)

157 anyone recall that blog? I think it came up when he kinda shot down some list of GMO fake science fears.
Posted by: illiniwek at April 14, 2019 01:45 PM (Cus5s)


In the Pipeline. Derek Lowe's blog.

Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara at April 14, 2019 01:49 PM (YqDXo)

158
a few years ago there was discussion here about some biotech blog ... the blog was for real scientists but was a useful resource. It shot down a few whacky ideas ... but I lost track of the blog in one of the windows updates that just shut down my computer (still).

This one is good:

https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/


Posted by: Hadrian the Seventh at April 14, 2019 01:49 PM (LsBY9)

159 If someone "else" is paying for it (which is how most American healthcare is positioned) everyone demands the Rolex instead of the Timex. And we collectively all end up paying trillions extra for it.

If everyone paid for every drug and treatment out of their own pocket, 99% of this would be solved over night and costs would be contained. But that's not health care will ever work.
Posted by: Blago at April 14, 2019 01:48 PM (UfkIY)


Exactly right.

Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara at April 14, 2019 01:49 PM (YqDXo)

160 Bandersnatch, so Tiger has to tap the front and back holes?

Posted by: Anna Puma at April 14, 2019 01:49 PM (5UVOn)

161
OT- We are getting buried in global warming today. It looks like a blizzard out there

Posted by: TheQuietMan at April 14, 2019 01:50 PM (A9waC)

162 OT. Hadrian, great to see you. Hope all is well. Various commenters were asking about you.

Posted by: Mrs. JTB at April 14, 2019 01:50 PM (bmdz3)

163 I believe in drugs. For years I paid my congressman extra so they wouldn't mess in my business. Somebody comes to them and says, I have a plan, if you put up three, four thousand dollar investment - we can make fifty thousand distributing with ObamaCare, so they can't resist. I want to control it as a business, to keep it respectable. I don't want it near schools - I don't want it sold to children! That's an infamia. In my city, we would keep the traffic in the blue areas- the libtards. They're animals anyway, so let them lose their souls.

Posted by: Big Pharma Tycoon at April 14, 2019 01:51 PM (Z+IKu)

164 "In the Pipeline. Derek Lowe's blog.

Posted by: Deplorable

excellent, thanks a bunch ... I spent an hour trying to find that once ...

Posted by: illiniwek at April 14, 2019 01:51 PM (Cus5s)

165 You can say bigger profits don't motivate past a certain point. Viagra was supposed to be available OTC in what, 2017? It's not. At least not in the US.
Pfizer got--no pun intended--an extension.

Posted by: JoeF. at April 14, 2019 01:52 PM (NFEMn)

166
Thank you, Mrs. JTB. Shouldn't be commenting at all but 1) it's Sunday, so Penance doesn't apply and 2) I know a bit about patents; I'm an inventor on 40 or so.

Posted by: Hadrian the Seventh at April 14, 2019 01:52 PM (LsBY9)

167 I like good drugs, I cannot lie

Posted by: Gary Busey at April 14, 2019 01:53 PM (wWwKk)

168 I applied for a patent for gravity but some damn Swiss guy working in the patent office "lost" the paperwork. Yeah, sure.

Posted by: Zombie Isaac Newton at April 14, 2019 01:54 PM (sdi6R)

169 Don't look now, but it appears Tiger is back. -14 with two holes to go and a two stroke lead. They better play fast, nasty weather is coming into the area and we're under a tornado watch.

Posted by: Bert G at April 14, 2019 01:54 PM (OMsf+)

170 Woods up by 2 with 2 to play. I wonder if he'll get a call from PDJT?

Posted by: Pete Seria at April 14, 2019 01:54 PM (7ZQe3)

171 Okay, lu be for live and call instead of fall?

That's my signal to self to try and be a little productive today.

Thanks for your thoughts, all.

Posted by: teej at April 14, 2019 01:55 PM (1XIkG)

172 Tiger tapping in too many holes is what got him in trouble in the first place.

Posted by: Insomniac at April 14, 2019 01:56 PM (NWiLs)

173 Guys shouldn't have to pay for boner pills.

Posted by: Sandra Flook at April 14, 2019 01:57 PM (EgshT)

174
151

Words

Posted by: teej at April 14, 2019 01:46 PM (1XIkG)


Yes I know and I completely agree.

Didn't go down that thread because the post was long enough without delving into the lack of Logos and how fallen today's clown world has become.

To go O/T towards that.

I believe that God has been infuriated by things like the Trans Kids, Jazz Jennings and Desmond Is Amazing.

Something is happening from it. I can feel it and I have seen three long time Atheists who came around and began to believe again as a direct result of that Trans Kids Abomination.

End O/T

Posted by: A Gentleman at April 14, 2019 01:59 PM (vzaDL)

175 George Papadopoulos @GeorgePapa19
Joseph Mifsud had a working relationship with the former Chief of Staff of Alexander Downer. All these bozos had vested interests in a Clinton presidency until they ended up all getting burned and outed by FBI/CIA themselves when she lost

What Senator Graham was likely referring to on Maria Bartiromo's show today is about FBI asset, Joseph Mifsud, dropping bizarre info in my lap about "Clinton's emails in the hands of the Russians" which I never asked for. His handler was Michael Gaeta FBI attache in Rome.

Posted by: Deep State is in DEEP SHIT at April 14, 2019 02:01 PM (BqBId)

176 And our "American" pharma corporations push this."

You misspelled "defense corporations "

Posted by: Anon a mouse at April 14, 2019 02:02 PM (6qErC)

177 And our "American" pharma corporations push this."

You misspelled "defense corporations "
Posted by: Anon a mouse at April 14, 2019 02:02 PM (6qErC)

You misspelled Archer Daniels Midland

Posted by: weirdflunky at April 14, 2019 02:03 PM (GwY6O)

178 >>>Ivermectin is wormer. Its what is in heartworm preventative for dogs and how I worm my horses and has been around for decades. So is 'river blindness' caused by a parasite?

Posted by: PaleRider is simply irredeemable at April 14, 2019 12:41 PM (UC0pf)
--------------------------------


Is rosacea parasitical?

Posted by: Braenyard at April 14, 2019 02:03 PM (pA4nI)

179 Trying to find where just one of my daily drugs in made. No such luck.

Posted by: NOT THAT GUY at April 14, 2019 02:04 PM (ZgQSJ)

180 You can say bigger profits don't motivate past a certain point. Viagra was supposed to be available OTC in what, 2017? It's not. At least not in the US.
Pfizer got--no pun intended--an extension.
Posted by: JoeF. at April 14, 2019 01:52 PM (NFEMn)


It's not approved for OTC use by the FDA, IIRC.

Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara at April 14, 2019 02:06 PM (YqDXo)

181 168 I applied for a patent for gravity but some damn Swiss guy working in the patent office "lost" the paperwork. Yeah, sure.
Posted by: Zombie Isaac Newton at April 14, 2019 01:54 PM (sdi6R)


I have patent applications pending for oxygen and fapping. I'm gonna be rich!

Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara at April 14, 2019 02:07 PM (YqDXo)

182 In summary, a French (Quebecois) canard which will not fly.

Posted by: Undocumented at April 14, 2019 02:07 PM (9FBVt)

183 If you pay for your meds, you can save tremendously by avoiding your local pharmacies like Walgreens and CVS.

Go to Healthwarehouse.com and compare their prices to what you're paying now. You won't believe the savings.

Posted by: Meade Lux Lewis at April 14, 2019 02:08 PM (hjaPQ)

184 Ivermectin is also heartguard for dogs

Posted by: CN at April 14, 2019 02:09 PM (U7k5w)

185 I have patent applications pending for oxygen and fapping. I'm gonna be rich!
Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara at April 14, 2019 02:07 PM (YqDXo)

You uh are gonna give special dispensation for at least one of those patents right?

Posted by: weirdflunky at April 14, 2019 02:09 PM (GwY6O)

186 32" Manchin's kid.

Posted by: CN at April 14, 2019 02:10 PM (U7k5w)

187 >>>55 I don't know details ... but that is the general argument I'd heard ... the US gets to fund all the RD, then BigPharma makes bulk deals with other governments.

As pointed out above, they don't really have a choice in this.

Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara at April 14, 2019 12:52 PM (YqDXo)
----------------------------


It's not a perfect situation but this is caused more by congress and its regulations than by Big Pharma alone.

And thinking that congress can help by writing more law is flawed.


Before drug insurance I bought through Canada. Generally one had a choice of manufacturers and the countries they were manufactured in. However, one can no more trust a third world product anymore than he can trust the third world in any other matter.

Posted by: Braenyard at April 14, 2019 02:10 PM (pA4nI)

188 168 I applied for a patent for gravity but some damn Swiss guy working in the patent office "lost" the paperwork. Yeah, sure.
Posted by: Zombie Isaac Newton at April 14, 2019 01:54 PM (sdi6R)


Probably Einstein. Recall he was a patent examiner in Switzerland.

Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara at April 14, 2019 02:14 PM (YqDXo)

189 At least one hipster CEO is cooling his heels in prison right now after being convicted of financial funny business in the pharmaceutical field.

Posted by: navybrat, sometime commentater at April 14, 2019 02:15 PM (w7KSn)

190 Christopher R. Taylor --

If you're here, in response to your question on the book thread, I think Cover C gives the best impression of a new, wide-open world. The others seem hind of "generic fantasy", IMO.

Posted by: empire1 at April 14, 2019 02:16 PM (peukx)

191 I'm all for laissez-faire capitalism in the pharmaceutical industry.

Let's do away with the Medicare prescription drug benefit provided by taxpayers that props their prices up so that they don't have so much government interference.

But they don't get to whine about government price controls while the federal government is their biggest customer.

Posted by: Bitter Clinger at April 14, 2019 02:19 PM (KnIfp)

192 N O O D - spells nood.

Posted by: Braenyard at April 14, 2019 02:24 PM (pA4nI)

193 Found the company that markets one of my main daily drugs through a mail order supply company. I say markets because they do not make at least some drugs, particularity two that were recalled. One made in India and the other in South Africa. The marketing company is a wholly owned "U. S." subsidiarity of a Swiss pharmaceutical company. Globalism.

Posted by: NOT THAT GUY at April 14, 2019 02:25 PM (ZgQSJ)

194 Hit a sore spot on this one. Like an above commenter, I use inhalers.

Albuterol's been on the market since the late 1960s. 2 years ago was $15, this year $125. It was and is available from 'foreign suppliers' for about $15.

Symbicort® has been out for 13 years based on a 1981 approval and was $40 last year, now $315. It was and is available from 'foreign suppliers' for about $35.

Probably complicated, but the producers, pharmacies and insurance are all raking it in with collaboration from the ACA.

Posted by: hooodathunkit at April 14, 2019 02:28 PM (SDF2Q)

195 Maria Bartiromo @MariaBartiromo

Breaking news: @RepMarkMeadows "the way they (FBI) used the media to plant stories, then use those same stories as a reason to get the warrant is unbelievable. That will all likely come out in the IG report"

Posted by: Deep State is in DEEP SHIT at April 14, 2019 02:28 PM (BqBId)

196 Here, take this drug, -it's exactly what you need.

Now I'm going slip my penis in your ass.

Posted by: Official Government Drug Specialist at April 14, 2019 02:32 PM (LuPts)

197
They've put me on this "biologic" for this damnable RA. It's a fairly new one dubbed "Simponi Aria". It's this shit:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golimumab

"List Price" for one treatment was $9.6K. That got knocked down by the insurance agreement to $4K. Insurance paid about hallf, and some other program the doc's office got me enrolled in paid almost all the rest. I pay something like $60 each infusion.

Posted by: publius, Rascally Rapscallion of a Poperin Pear at April 14, 2019 02:32 PM (f1Vqw)

198 Off track, but, if money and China are involved, one has to wonder how the Clinton syndicate profited. It would be the natural thing.

Posted by: RICO the CGI at April 14, 2019 02:35 PM (d6NzT)

199 River blindness & ivermectin. Yes, river blindness is caused by an insect (helminth).

The blindness is caused when the microscopic worm-like larvae inside the eye whip around and destroy the retina. All previous antithelmics or insecticides caused this to happen in the process of killing the

Ivermectin kills the organisms by paralyzing them, and with other therapy to help the body remove the detritus, preserves eyesight. Ivermectin is great stuff !

Posted by: hooodathunkit at April 14, 2019 02:39 PM (SDF2Q)

200 How do they come up with the names of these drugs? Ivermectin?

Posted by: Next in line at April 14, 2019 03:00 PM (Z7a3n)

201 " Apparently the pharma companies negotiate prices with foreign governments who have socialized medicine, "

Yeah, rickl, if you call telling the drug companies: "Either you accept this price or we'll just let our drug companies break your formulas and patents immediately and produce it cheaper." negotiation.

Bottom line, for 50 years our globalist free traders have allowed foreign governments to rip off our IP without compensation. So if you want no new drugs, support this.

Posted by: SDN at April 14, 2019 03:28 PM (3XdZI)

202 Really ? Pharma.org is an unbiased source ?

Come on. All this may be entirely true, but what is likely a lobbying arm of the Pharmaceutical industry - pharma.org - is almost guaranteed to be giving you one side of the story.

Posted by: deadrody at April 14, 2019 03:30 PM (svv54)

203 Here's an idea... Instead of having a regime where it is the US government regulating US citizens to make sure they don't bypass the artificial controls that the drug companies want erected, we throw the problem back in the laps of the drug companies. If they want to sell their drugs to Canada at knocked down rates from which they sell them at in the US market, well then they can go lobby the Canadian government.

Tell the Canadian government that if you want to continue to get those below market drug prices then you, the Canadian government must put in export controls to make sure that those below market price drugs don't escape the Canadian market and get into the US market.

Or not. Continue to sell to Canada at below market rates and just accept the fact that some of those drugs will find their way back into the US and undercut the high prices they are charging here. Leave it up to the drug companies to figure out how to maintain their dual price structure.

Posted by: Anon Y. Mous at April 14, 2019 04:20 PM (t45a9)

204 This is because we live in a interest/usury based economic system. As anyone that has studied the history of booms and busts knows, a country that has been shackled with this inevitably destructive economic system has to keep borrowing money into existence, be it paper or ones and zeros. The traitors in government all eventually come to the conclusion that to maintain their cush job at the trough, they have to approve policies that spend more money. If they don't, the treadmill stops and the masses start looking for a scapegoat. Pharmaceuticals offers a double dip method for spending money. Driving up the costs of products produced and subsidizing the slaves that can't afford them. They look at that as a win-win situation. Keep the treadmill running and keep my head on my shoulders.
Posted by: Anonymous White Male at April 14, 2019 01:44 PM (3sjI6)

So if charging interest is bad, why isn't the Islamic world a hyperpower in terms of finance? And I mean the ENTIRE Islamic world, not just, say, Dubai.

Posted by: CatchThirtyThr33 at April 14, 2019 05:22 PM (LzP8w)

205 So is 'river blindness' caused by a parasite?
Posted by: PaleRider is simply irredeemable at April 14, 2019 12:41 PM (UC0pf)

As it happens, a worm. Onchocerca volvulus.

Posted by: Fox2! at April 14, 2019 05:45 PM (MwFQu)

206 @ 200 on 'why the name'?
Ivermectin is an avermactin, a chemical derived from the bacteria Streptomyces avermitilis.

It wipes out the parasites that cause Elephantiasis and river blindness. It also wipes out head lice, scabies, mites, whip worms, roundworms, threadworms, fleas, and ticks among other parasite.

Very low mammal toxicity, except collie dogs and kittens, but it's revolutionized parasite control.

Posted by: hooodathunkit at April 14, 2019 09:17 PM (SDF2Q)

207 #14 notsothoreau...I, too, use inhalers. When TPTB decided to prohibit fluorocarbons from inhalers the drug companies had to reformulate their inhalers which added time to their patents. I think just this year albuterol is, once again, able to have generics. But last year my albuterol was over $100 (this year it's $32-I have no insurance). The inhalers foracort and Q-var were over $200 so I order them from Global Care RX in Canada for about $54 for 3 inhalers each. No regrets in not paying the American RX companies here.

Posted by: S.Lynn at April 14, 2019 09:50 PM (RbwbO)

(Jump to top of page)






Processing 0.03, elapsed 0.0287 seconds.
15 queries taking 0.0069 seconds, 216 records returned.
Page size 136 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.7 alpha.



MuNuvians
MeeNuvians
Polls! Polls! Polls!
Frequently Asked Questions
The (Almost) Complete Paul Anka Integrity Kick
Top Top Tens
Greatest Hitjobs

The Ace of Spades HQ Sex-for-Money Skankathon
A D&D Guide to the Democratic Candidates
Margaret Cho: Just Not Funny
More Margaret Cho Abuse
Margaret Cho: Still Not Funny
Iraqi Prisoner Claims He Was Raped... By Woman
Wonkette Announces "Morning Zoo" Format
John Kerry's "Plan" Causes Surrender of Moqtada al-Sadr's Militia
World Muslim Leaders Apologize for Nick Berg's Beheading
Michael Moore Goes on Lunchtime Manhattan Death-Spree
Milestone: Oliver Willis Posts 400th "Fake News Article" Referencing Britney Spears
Liberal Economists Rue a "New Decade of Greed"
Artificial Insouciance: Maureen Dowd's Word Processor Revolts Against Her Numbing Imbecility
Intelligence Officials Eye Blogs for Tips
They Done Found Us Out, Cletus: Intrepid Internet Detective Figures Out Our Master Plan
Shock: Josh Marshall Almost Mentions Sarin Discovery in Iraq
Leather-Clad Biker Freaks Terrorize Australian Town
When Clinton Was President, Torture Was Cool
What Wonkette Means When She Explains What Tina Brown Means
Wonkette's Stand-Up Act
Wankette HQ Gay-Rumors Du Jour
Here's What's Bugging Me: Goose and Slider
My Own Micah Wright Style Confession of Dishonesty
Outraged "Conservatives" React to the FMA
An On-Line Impression of Dennis Miller Having Sex with a Kodiak Bear
The Story the Rightwing Media Refuses to Report!
Our Lunch with David "Glengarry Glen Ross" Mamet
The House of Love: Paul Krugman
A Michael Moore Mystery (TM)
The Dowd-O-Matic!
Liberal Consistency and Other Myths
Kepler's Laws of Liberal Media Bias
John Kerry-- The Splunge! Candidate
"Divisive" Politics & "Attacks on Patriotism" (very long)
The Donkey ("The Raven" parody)
News/Chat