Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

[iam416]

Teresa May officially confirms that the UK has to leave the EU single market.

So, do all the predictions of economic armageddon for the UK finally come true?

[SeattleLionsFan]

I could not believe that the pound was trading at about 1.20 to the dollar.

[Dr. Strangelove]

The pound has jumped about 2% today but it's worth recalling what direction it's gone since the Brexit vote (sorry for the size)

[Hannibal]

Drug costs are a major Free Rider problem. It is for this reason that I wouldn't be opposed to drug price controls in the US anymore.

But in the end, when things go generic, they get cheap. Nothing that you pay an arm and a leg for nowadays existed when you were born.

[AlabamAlum]

As an aside, the unintended consequences of the FDA's UDI (unapproved drug initiative) where drugs that existed before 1962 were "researched" by pharm companies and then the pharm companies were granted 3 to 7 year "patents". Drugles like colchicine, a gout drug, saw its price rise from 7 cents a tablet to over $5 a tablet.

The FDA has made a ton of such gaffes going back to its inception.

In short, big pharma has blame. So does the FDA.

[froot loops]

So, do all the predictions of economic armageddon for the UK finally come true?

I'm not sure if they will come true but I think they will lose Scotland.

[CGVT]

I was going to bring that up. My insurance won't cover colchicine any more. I knew that it was some sort of patent thing, but wasn't sure about it. I thought it went up a lot more than that, though.

[Da Geezer]

If you have an opportunity to listen to the Theresa May speech, do so. Trump should hire her speechwriter. The actual severing of EU ties has to be approved by Parliment.

Talent, is there any reason that it takes 3 years for the issuance of a patient? It seems like a 15% loss in time-under-patient would be significant enough for the inventor to want his full 20 years.

[iam416]

Drug costs are a major Free Rider problem.

Yeah, I assume you mean other significant markets price control and they companies make it up in the US market. That's an issue.

But in the end, when things go generic, they get cheap. Nothing that you pay an arm and a leg for nowadays existed when you were born.

This is correct and important.

[iam416]

Talent, is there any reason that it takes 3 years for the issuance of a patient? It seems like a 15% loss in time-under-patient would be significant enough for the inventor to want his full 20 years.

It's an approximate time. The term of the patent used to be measured as 17 years from date of issuance, but that created some real gaming that I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain.

20 years from date of filing is intended to (a) eliminate gaming; and (b) bring the US system into accord with other major patent systems. There are provisions that allow for "patent term adjustment" if the prosecution of the patent takes longer than 3 years.

There are also expedited tracks for smaller pre-revenue companies. It's mostly a cost-saving thing -- they pay less overall, but do take a greater up front hit.

[iam416]

The patent system grants inventors exclusivity. They are free to gouge for all they're worth. In exchange, the invention is disclosed to the public and after a limited period it's free for all to practice. Big Pharma uses this system the same way everyone else does. The prices for drugs move up and down as one would predict.

Now, whether or not you think pharmaceutical companies ought to be able to avail themselves of the full benefit of the patent system is a policy question. I haven't been persuaded they shouldn't. I'm open to fact-based policy argument that weighs, among other things, costs and creativity. But my default position, however, is that everyone ought to have full access to the patent system and any limitation on that access ought to be fully justified -- the burden is on those seeking the exception to the rule.

So, I'm not terribly troubled by Pharma companies reaping the advantages of their government-granted market exclusivity.

[Da Geezer]

Hannibal:

Drug costs are a major Free Rider problem. It is for this reason that I wouldn't be opposed to drug price controls in the US anymore.

That's where I was until I read articles like I posted a couple of days ago regarding Medicare Part D (Rx coverage). The fact is that Medicare D has cost 50% of its projected cost, and cost to seniors has been relatively stable since 2007. MI has 34 insurers offering D, and they have cut individual deals with the drug companies. The deals they cut are substantially cheaper than the deals the government made directly with the drug companies for Medicaid.

Where I see "free-riders" being a problem is in the vaccination situation that has been discussed. There exists some, though very small, risk with vaccination. It is there. But the benefits of vaccination so far outweigh the risks that sensible folks have their children vaccinated. The anti-vac people are true free-riders in the sense that they are protected by the rest of us who do the rational thing.

Also, I think that folks who actually saw polio have a far greater appreciation for vaccination in general. When I was growing up, our small church (<100 people) had two adults who had contracted polio and were wheelchair-bound. I also recall how much gratitude was felt toward Dr. Salk.

[AlabamAlum]

I was going to bring that up. My insurance won't cover colchicine any more. I knew that it was some sort of patent thing, but wasn't sure about it. I thought it went up a lot more than that, though.

It's up to more than $10 a tablet now in the US.

[Dr. Strangelove]

If discussing healthcare costs I believe my post of August 19, 2016 was the definitive word on the subject

http://detroitlionsforum.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1037190&postcount=10566

[iam416]

Some positions are so important they ought not be linked but quoted in full at every opportunity.