Are you a dead-beat loser? Can't pay your bills? Want something for free? Go to Maine

[collegiateLifter]

Litigation against pharma companies often is extra costly because very few people outside of pharma understand the cost-benefit models that pharma companies actually use.

A lot of cutting edge pharma stuff simply doesn't jive with current tort/negligence laws. For example, (this is a crude example - I am tired, sorry) if thereis a new bone cancer drug out, and it costs $1000 per week to adminsiter, but it increases the survival rate from 5% to 15%.

patients aregoing to clamor for it. Yet, as people take it and die anyway, lawyers are going to sue, and the way negligence laws are written, plaintiffs will win.

However, the pharma industry appeals almost all of these, and almost always wins the appeals. Thesearethekindsof costs that are written off. Pharm trials are also super expensive because many experts are required due to the scientific nature of the business.

it is a more complex business than most others.

Regradless, government controlling prices is bad.

While I sympathise and relate to the points about negligence and idiots bringing down thrift, innovation and generally good things, it's important to recognize that the phamaceutical industry is a hardly a flailing industry.

They contribute more money to politicians than any other industry, more than #2 and #3 combined.

Furthermore the pharms are price-setters with their new drugs and should be carefully watched over due to the nature of pharmaceutical use.

A life raft may not be very valuable to lay people, but demand becomes remarkably inelastic when selling life rafts to people who are drowning. Likewise with AIDS drugs, etc, judicous use of oversight would be wise.

 

[collegiateLifter]

the article you posted is very slanted and the writer needs to research this more.

no kidding.... all of his are. Very difficult to wade through the BS; not really worth the time.