In the article titled, Why the $600 EpiPen Costs $69 in Britain by James Paton and Naomi Kresge depicts the overwhelming increase in the price of the lifesaving medical device in the United States. The EpiPen’s prices are comparable to the new iPhone 7 in the U.S. while it would only less than a leather case in Britain. In the article, an advocacy group was able to report that it is still a profitable business when being sold at lower prices. Take a look at Europe’s model for drug pricing compared to the U.S. In the U.K., the government and the pharmaceutical industry negotiate on the spending limits on health services. If a pharmaceutical company exceeds that negotiated cap, they must repay the government for their over expenditures. While in the U.S. they had some sort of …show more content…
This is definitely a problem for consumers because they can have ties with the pharmaceutical and they have the ability to evoke the best interests for their company when pricing drugs. According to the drug makers and the intermediaries, the higher cost are needed to pay of rebates and providing discounts for insurers and employers. Despite providing incentives to those with insurance, this alienates those who have little to no insurance, they are left to burden the higher drug prices. In the U.S., there isn’t a checks and balances system when it comes to drug pricing like in the U.K. therefore some critics do not blame Mylan for raising the price for these drugs. Making and testing for innovative medicines requires years of research, which means money. Therefore, I do understand that drug makers, the pharmaceutical company and its investors want to get paid for the amount of time and money that they put into their new drug. However, I believe that they need to find that particular medium that helps the people especially those who are less fortunate and in need for this life-saving medication while being able to make a
Louise C. Cope et al, investigated the impact of non-medical prescribing. Non-medical prescribing could be evaluated through the NMP, or other health practitioner such as GP, and patients. Currently there is limited information on how NMP has impacted other professions, such as radiographer, optometrists and physiotherapists. Personally, I think this is due to how recent these professions gained the right to prescribe. Most of the findings have been extremely positive, with limited disadvantages. Within this evaluation of NMP “students who are becoming NMPs felt that the programme provided them with adequate knowledge to prescribe with some stating that the period of learning in practice was ‘the most valuable part of the course’”
Working in the pharmaceutical industry, there are different types of environments you could possibly work in. There are chain pharmacies, like any kind of grocery store or CVS. There are franchise pharmacies, which are also known as apothecaries. Also, there are community pharmacies, which are also known as retail pharmacies. Some of them are independent pharmacies, which is usually owned by a pharmacist or a group of pharmacists.. There are hospital pharmacies, in which are in the hospital. There are many more different types, these are only a few.
Med-Pharmex Incorporated is known nationally and abroad as a pharmaceutical manufacturer of animal-related products. Before gaining fame worldwide, the business began its journey to success as a small lab in 1983, which slowly grew over time. Since then, the company maintains its main goal, and that is to produce drugs that promote the health of companion animals, such as dogs, cats, and horses, as well as food-producing animals, such as pork and chickens. To ensure legal responsibility, the company’s manufacturing process is examined by the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Med-Pharmex works closely with veterinary clinics who purchase their life-saving drugs and represent them in the market. Despite manufacturing drugs, the
Depending on which insurance consumers have can affect how much out of cost or co-payments consumers will have to pay. Insurance can cover either a large portion of the cost of prescriptions or eliminate the $200.00 co-payment that EpiPens require. Some insurances may be able to perform both. Adam Fein, president of the Pembroke Consulting, states that “some insurers may have negotiated deals with Mylan that end up making the brand-name cheaper than the generic” (Drake 3). If this is the case, some insurances would rather have consumers purchase the name-brand version of the EpiPen rather than the generic version that is offered. Mylan Pharmaceuticals offers a coupon that takes off up to $100.00 per prescription. This coupon is limited to only three prescriptions of two-pack cartons, however. This would leave the total of the EpiPens to $500.00 before taxes. Mylan Pharmaceuticals also offers the Mylan’s Patient Assistance Program which “allows patients, whom are without insurance, eligibility to apply for free EpiPens” (Drake 5). Mylan Pharmaceuticals now offers no-copayment fees to those who use a savings card provided by Mylan when purchasing the name-brand
Background: Merck & Co. is an American pharmaceutical company and one of the largest pharmaceutical companies in the world. In 1971 the United States approved the use of an MMR vaccine made by Merck, containing the Jeryl Lynn strain of mumps vaccine. In 1978 Merck introduced the MMR II, using a different strain of the rubella vaccine. In 1997 the FDA required Merck to conduct effectiveness testing of MMRII. Initially it was over 95%; to continue the license; Merck had to convince the FDA that the effectiveness stayed at a similar rate over the years.
... (2013) IMS health study points to a declining cost curve for U.S. medicines in 2012 Retrieved from http://www.imshealth.com/portal/site/ims/menuitem.d248e29c86589c9c30e81c033208c22a/?vgnextoid=8659cf4add48e310VgnVCM10000076192ca2RCRD&vgnextchannel=437879d7f269e210VgnVCM10000071812ca2RCRD&vgnextfmt=default
Since generic drug company Mylan purchased EpiPen nine years ago, the current cost of EpiPen has increased by five hundred percent (Wieczner n.pag.). Earlier in August, Mylan’s CEO, Heather Bresch, on a conference call argues that EpiPen sticker shock should be accused partly on Obamacare (qtd. in Wieczner n.pag.) Bresch mentions that employers’ risen usage of high deductible plans, one of the aftereffects of the law, has followed in consumers paying extra out of pocket for the drug, and that is where lots of complaints around EpiPen is coming from (qtd. in Wieczner n.pag.). Besides, Bresch adds that the approximate six-hundred dollars extensive charge, that when you compare other treatments, the EpiPen does not land into the expensive product category (qtd.
Why do consumers purchase specific drugs for various ailments, sicknesses or diseases they might have? Why do physicians prescribe certain drugs over competitive drugs that may be available to the public? Why is it that most of us can easily name specific drugs that fit the many ailments of today’s society? On the surface the answer might be as simple as good TV advertising or radio commercials or even internet adds. The truth of matter is the major pharmaceutical manufacturers own the patents on these drugs and this gives them all of the marketing budget and muscle they need to promote the drug and control the pricing. The incentives for larger pharmaceutical companies are very enticing and as a result, they don’t mind spending the time in clinical trials and patent courts to get their drugs approved. Some will even get patents on the process by which the drug is manufactured, ensuring that no competitor can steal the drug or the process. This protects their large financial investment and nearly guarantees a large return for their investors. Many consumer rights groups claim this is nothing more than legalizing monopolies for the biggest manufacturers.
It is said that name-brand prescription drugs in Canada cost approximately 40% less than they do in America. But it is illegal for the transport of drugs from Canada to America. Why? It is because Pharmaceuticals are simply greedy and prey on victims that are in need of their products to survive. It makes it hard for large households on a budget to purchase drugs to keep healthy. The way pharmaceutical companies look at their clients is like this: It is a life or death situation for them so the customers have to buy it in order to survive. According to the annual Fortune 500 survey, the pharmaceutical industry, expectedly, made it at the top of the list of the most profitable. The top seven pharmaceutical companies took in more profit-money than the top seven media companies, the top seven airline companies, the top seven oil companies, and the top seven car manufacture companies. (…cost so much, CNN) The profits of pharmaceutical companies are outrageous and extreme. There are many reasons to why these companies are greedily taking advantage of customers. The number one reason is because people who are need of these prescriptions have no other choice but to purchase them.
The article that was chosen is entitled “US lawmakers press Mylan on EpiPen price increases”. As the title suggests the article is about the push to find out exactly why the cost of EpiPen a lifesaving medication has increased from 100 dollars to 500 dollars in the past eight years. It goes on to explain the two routes taken by two lawmakers on the U.S. Senate's Judiciary Committee; one lawmaker asking Maylan directly and the other asking the Federal Trade Commission to look into the issue. This issue is related to pharmacy because that is where one can buy EpiPens and also the pharmacists could have played some role in bringing to notice the price increase.
Why are the prices so high? Some critics of the drug companies argue that the larger firms are ripping off the American public, are dishonest and, in some cases, unsafe. On the other hand, there are health care workers such as doctors and their supporters who claim that research and testing for drugs costs money. This supposedly justifies their prices for their products. Also, as an argument to their side, they say that their practice is a benefit to the improvement to mankind. It is a life saving business, but are these prices justified? As one can see, this is a very important issue in medicine today. It affects everyone involved with medicine, which is much of the American public. It also affects the physicians and drug makers.
However, according to Jenna Flannigan, write at Healthline.com, America’s current for-profit system allows for competition between medical and pharmaceutical companies which drives prices up astronomically. “In countries where health insurance is government-run or nonprofit-run, there is no profit factor to drive up prices…For example, a typical bypass surgery in the Netherlands costs about $15,000 while in the United States it costs about $75,000” (Flannigan). This figure illustrates how the US’s needless competition between private, for-profit organizations make medical care unnecessarily unattainable to those who aren’t very affluent or do not have comprehensive medical care. These bloated prices do not even contribute to better care a majority of the time, as pointed out by political consultant Karin J. Robinson. “Here in Britain, for instance, we spend about 8% of the country's annual GDP on health care, compared to 15% in the US, and yet the overall health of the population is similar, with perhaps even a slight advantage for the UK” (Robinson). America’s current system is far more expensive, but for what reason? A healthcare system should be driven a will to help those in need, not for the personal gain of companies that are rife with greed. America needs to follow the path of other first-world nations and take a different approach to
The ability to become reflective in practice has become a necessary skill for health professionals. This is to ensure that health professionals are continuing with their daily learning and improving their practice. Reflective practice plays a big part in healthcare today and is becoming increasingly noticed.
With the increased cost of manufacturing, pharmaceutical companies have been divesting in their smaller or less profit making operations and focus on large segments. Many Pharmaceutical companies sold their manufacturing sites to contract manufacturing organizations. The dynamics of interfacing with contract manufacturing organization added intricacy in pharmaceutical supply chain network of pharmaceutical companies.
Pfizer Case Study Pfizer Inc. is a large pharmaceutical company that engages in the discovery of new technologies, the manufacture of prescription and "over the counter" (OTC) medicines, as well as the marketing of such products. It operates in three distinct segments that include Human Health, Consumer Healthcare, and Animal Health. For fiscal year 2004, the company generated approximately $53 billion in revenue that contributed to over $11 billion in net income. Pfizer, 2004. "The 'Pfizer'" The Cow and Calf division of the Animal Health segment markets its products direct to cattle ranchers.