Re: OT universal health care


"BillB" <bogus@xxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:BSDLk.12550$YN3.575@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

"Beldin the Sorcerer" <beldinyyz@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:ZFzLk.2875$Rx2.362@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Bill, you simply don't get it.
The costs of drugs in this country are so high because we subsidize the
rest of the world.

You simply don't get it. We weren't talking about the cost of drugs; we
were talking about the cost of health care in general. Go back to sleep.

Bill, you drunken sot, drug costs are a huge part of the cost of health
care.

So is advancing technology, where we ALSO subsidize the world, largely by
funding the R&D.

Companies provide medical products such as pharmaceuticals and medical
devices. The nation spends a substantial amount on medical research, mostly
privately funded. As of 2000, non-profit private organizations (such as the
Howard Hughes Medical Institute) funded 7%, private industry funded 57%, and
the tax-funded National Institutes of Health supported 36% of medical
research in the U.S.[13] However, by 2003, the NIH provided only 28% of
medical research funding; finance from private industry increased 102% from
1994 to 2003.[14] Research and development for applications is primarily
done in commercial labs, while the government and universities fund the
majority of general research

The Congressional Budget Office has found that "about half of all growth in
health care spending in the past several decades was associated with changes
in medical care made possible by advances in technology." Other factors
included higher income levels, changes in insurance coverage, and rising
prices.[17] Hospitals and physician spending take the largest share of the
health care dollar while prescription drugs take about 10 percent. [18] The
use of prescription drugs is increasing among adults who have drug coverage

By the way, Canadian law does not "fix prices on newly developed drugs, no
matter the research costs". As usual, you don't have your facts straight.
*** for brains, yes they do.

In fact, I'll show you.

http://www.pmprb-cepmb.gc.ca/english/view.asp?x=134&mid=68



Although the PMPRB was created fifteen years ago, in 1987, the debates over
drug patents and drug prices go back several decades earlier. In the 1960's,
three separate commissions of inquiry concluded that drug prices in Canada
were too high and that the federal government needed to act. The Restrictive
Trade Practices Commission went so far as to recommend the abolition of
patents for drugs, concluding that the public interest in access to
competitively priced medicines was greater than in granting exclusive rights
to innovators. In 1969, Parliament found a compromise and amended the Patent
Act to broaden access to compulsory licensing for pharmaceuticals. Fifteen
years later, the Eastman Commission of Inquiry concluded that the 1969
amendments had the desired effect; they permitted the growth of generic
competition, leading to lower drug prices and significant savings on the
total drug bill.1

But those benefits came at a cost. By the mid-1980's, Canada's drug patent
laws were out of step with those of our major trading partners and
manufacturers were doing their research and development elsewhere. In
response, Parliament repealed the pharmaceutical compulsory licensing
provisions through Bills C-22 and C-91 in 1987 and 1993. The Government of
the day identified the "five pillars" of this policy: protecting
intellectual property in Canada; encouraging pharmaceutical research and
development; respecting international trading obligations; promoting
healthcare; and protecting consumer interests. While many Canadians are
familiar with, and probably debated, the overall policy thrust of Bills C-22
and C-91, few noted that it also introduced what was arguably a revolution
in our approach to drug price controls. During the era of compulsory
licensing, we relied on market forces to protect consumers from excessive
prices. The elimination of compulsory licensing required an alternate
approach and, for the first time, Canada embarked on a program of direct
price controls for patented drugs

More specifically, the PMPRB contributes to Canadian health care and
protects consumer interests by ensuring that the prices charged by
manufacturers of patented medicines are not excessive. The Board is a
quasi-judicial tribunal with the power to impose remedies if it finds,
following a public hearing, that a price is excessive.



The Patent Act provides guidance by setting out certain factors that the
Board shall take into account in deciding if a price is excessive. It also
allows the PMPRB to establish non-binding guidelines in consultation with
stakeholders. It has done so. Based on the statutory factors, the PMPRB's
Price Guidelines establish these limits:

a.. The prices of most new patented drugs cannot exceed the price of the
most expensive drug that treats the same disease;
b.. The prices of breakthrough or substantial improvement drugs cannot
exceed the median of the price in other industrialized countries;
c.. Prices cannot increase more than the Consumer Price Index; and
d.. The price in Canada can never be the highest in the world




There's a whole lot more in there, Billie-Boy.

Show me where "Costs of research and development" are even considered?



Look again at that "Cannot be the highest in the world."



Who pays that? Why, the US. Who helps out every other country on the planet.






.

Loading