Submitted by ILikeTasks t3_zlmei4 in UpliftingNews
[deleted] t1_j06qv1z wrote
[deleted]
Fritzo2162 t1_j070gim wrote
It's expensive to make now, but machines could be made to automate much of the process and we'd eventually have Star Trek-style medical replicators that could scan an illness and synthesize a treatment based on body conditions. We have some cool stuff coming down the pike.
BuckUpBingle t1_j071wkb wrote
The problem is that any amount of automization means that the producers spend less, not that the end user pays less.
[deleted] t1_j072m5z wrote
[deleted]
RGB3x3 t1_j075vbi wrote
Yeah, but we're talking about pharmaceuticals in the US. Starting at a high cost for the patient means the company can continue to charge that much while they bring their own costs down. Or even bring the consumer cost up over time.
Just look at Insulin. Costs almost nothing to make, but the patient pays hundreds
[deleted] t1_j077250 wrote
[deleted]
Fritzo2162 t1_j079bid wrote
I'm using Cost Plus and can't recommend it enough. I have $89 in prescriptions per month- it's $16 through that site. Last time I was in for a checkup I turned my doctor on to it so he can mention it to those that need help.
LookAtItGo123 t1_j07rij3 wrote
Heh let's see how long it goes before he suicides with bullets to the back of his head.
[deleted] t1_j078019 wrote
[deleted]
Anxious-Shapeshifter t1_j07c35z wrote
Yeah . . . That was removed from the bill.
And is unfortunately a perfect example of this person's point.
In Economics, this is what's considered an "inelastic demand" meaning that if the alternative is death, pharma can charge whatever they want, and people will pay it.
Like that movie Repo Men were they took artificial organs out of people when they couldn't afford the insane debt they took out to get them. The prices were insane because the alternative was death.
But_Why_Male_Models t1_j07s4x5 wrote
Have a source for that? Biden literally said insulin costs were going to be capped in a speech a month or so ago.
Anxious-Shapeshifter t1_j08imkl wrote
Yes the republicans fought to strip it from the bill. Its why it took months longer to pass.
Currently, its only capped if you're on Medicare. Why? Because the government pays for it if you're on Medicare. But for everyone else? They're fucked.
https://www.cnn.com/2022/08/07/politics/insulin-cap-democrats-reconciliation-bill/index.html
https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/republicans-block-insulin-price-cap-really-gone-rcna42177
https://www.benefitspro.com/2022/08/16/35-insulin-cap-removed-from-democratic-bill-pack
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/07/us/politics/insulin-cap.html
https://www.axios.com/2022/08/07/insulin-price-cap-reconciliation
https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2022/08/08/insulin-price-cap-diabetes-senate-republicans/
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/insulin-price-cap-senate-republicans-block-inflation-reduction-act/
But_Why_Male_Models t1_j08m8ta wrote
Scumbag republicans. At least those on Medicare will benefit.
Anxious-Shapeshifter t1_j08mvxo wrote
Right? They only kept it for Medicare because the government was going to be paying for it. And if it's their spending money they get involved. You'd think it would be counter intuitive for them, seeing as a large portion of their voter base are older baby boomers who likely need cheaper insulin. Buuuut I digress.
But_Why_Male_Models t1_j08pdyn wrote
They’ll just tell those old republican baby boomers that it’s the democrats fault and they’ll believe them. 🤮
Anxious-Shapeshifter t1_j08titk wrote
No joke, they would too. I have an aunt that is super republican. She's on welfare, Medicaid and lives in subsidized housing. ALWAYS votes republican. Blows my mind. How she so brainwashed to literally vote against her own better interest I'll never understand.
But_Why_Male_Models t1_j092ohf wrote
Yea, it’s truly mind blowing. Very frustrating to say the least.
[deleted] t1_j08f5ki wrote
[deleted]
blackbeltmessiah t1_j07vcxu wrote
He doesn’t because he’s full of sht
Anxious-Shapeshifter t1_j08fkfx wrote
Yes the republicans fought to strip it from the bill. Its why it took months longer to pass.
Currently, its only capped if you're on Medicare. Why? Because the government pays for it if you're on Medicare. But for everyone else? They're fucked.
But here's your sources... I think this is every major news site.
https://www.cnn.com/2022/08/07/politics/insulin-cap-democrats-reconciliation-bill/index.html
https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/republicans-block-insulin-price-cap-really-gone-rcna42177
https://www.benefitspro.com/2022/08/16/35-insulin-cap-removed-from-democratic-bill-pack
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/07/us/politics/insulin-cap.html
https://www.axios.com/2022/08/07/insulin-price-cap-reconciliation
https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2022/08/08/insulin-price-cap-diabetes-senate-republicans/
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/insulin-price-cap-senate-republicans-block-inflation-reduction-act/
blackbeltmessiah t1_j07v7ow wrote
“That was removed from the bill”… lol? Im not sure the youtuber you are listening to is giving you accurate info. Assuming your goal isnt just to lie about it. 👍
Anxious-Shapeshifter t1_j08gfju wrote
Man, its comments like that make all of us Millennials look like uninformed dick cheese.
But I'm an optimist, so here's that "I'm Just a Bill" cartoon from Schoolhouse Rock that I HOPE you've seen in school so you learn how the democratic process in America works.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tyeJ55o3El0
Because that's what caused the insulin cap to be removed from the bill. The House (that's the Congress btw) passed it in March, but the Senate GOP fought to have it removed before they would vote on it. So it was removed, they voted and it passed without it.
FawksyBoxes t1_j079dd2 wrote
If you are on medicare if I remember correctly.
VicarBook t1_j081gdu wrote
Yes, the $35 cap is only for those on Medicare. Republicans voted against that for everyone. Clearly some people heard $35 and said wow Congress was finally doing something that 95% of the population is for and didn't follow up to make sure that was actually the case.
[deleted] t1_j075ci9 wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_j07uq13 wrote
[deleted]
blackbeltmessiah t1_j07uinm wrote
Right but the problem is the motivation for the producer to not look at that as more profit isnt there. Lowered production cost just means more money for the producer. This is why there are guardrails being put on insulin. Needs to be placed on a lot more if not the whole system.
GD_Bats t1_j0738d0 wrote
That’s an issue with how we keep insisting society be structured and run. Personally I don’t think it’s sustainable and we will either change how we do things or suffer greatly as a species.
BuckUpBingle t1_j086i21 wrote
The “we” in this statement of doing an ungodly amount of heavy lifting.
GD_Bats t1_j087aih wrote
If you are interacting enough with civilization that you have internet access, by every definition you are perpetuating that capitalist system despite all efforts to the opposite.
Agonlaire t1_j08n7hr wrote
People are so needlessly afraid of challenging capitalism, like they'll get an embargo or something... wait a minute.
Hutcho12 t1_j07e84i wrote
That’s absolutely not true. Automation has brought down costs massively for consumers. There’s so many examples I dont know where to start. The whole Industrial Revolution for example.
BuckUpBingle t1_j086kyl wrote
Try pointing to something in the last 50 years for a start.
crono141 t1_j08elb8 wrote
Flat panel TVs. My first lcd TV cost me 1700 dollars and was 36", 720p. 3 years later I bought one for 1200 that was 55 inches, 1080p. In the last year I bought a new OLED for 1500 bucks, 65" 4k, and it's picture quality is easily the best of any I've ever had.
Not only did prices go down during that time, but quality went WAY up.
hiddenflames5462 t1_j07aa46 wrote
And in the US it will never go down, and likely the price will get doubled like most medical treatments.
capaldithenewblack t1_j082kgy wrote
Bonus if it’s a truly life saving med. Then they know we’ll REALLY buy it at their quoted price.
flugenblar t1_j08j208 wrote
If you can treat a disease for 10 or 20 years, the price will go down. If the medicine cures the disease, the price will skyrocket because you can only sell it once to a patient.
~US medicine business
Piss-Ant t1_j07cph9 wrote
That’s CAPTAIN Pike to you ensign!
burmerd t1_j07kjq3 wrote
Yeah, I agree, and I admit I'm a little cynical. Like, my dog can get vaccinated for Lyme's disease, but people can't.
I've read that the bigger push is the kind of care that costs a lot and "manages" a disease, versus outright cures (obviously all kinds of research is still happening) so I just always keep that in the back of my mind when I read about new drugs and research.
Fritzo2162 t1_j07l80c wrote
There IS a vaccine for Lyme disease, but it fell victim to negative press that lead to insufficient demand, so it was discontinued. Antivaxxers won that round.
cld1984 t1_j072wtn wrote
It’s expensive to make but all signs lately seem to point to individualized medicine being the future. Just look at cancer. There are tons of new treatments that target cancers with specific genes.
This style of medicine will save so many lives and will only get cheaper
cygnoids t1_j07bm54 wrote
A lot of the focus for these therapies is how to decrease the cost for personalized medicine. Manufacturing these therapies at the scale required for efficacy is currently expensive but companies are working to reduce these costs
flugenblar t1_j08ik4k wrote
Maybe somebody needs to be working on developing a vaccine printer.
BattleForIthor t1_j0asfjp wrote
CAR T-cell therapy is what it sounds like you are referring to… and frankly, it does seem as though that is the future.
[deleted] t1_j07vlbp wrote
[deleted]
Shrewd_GC t1_j08tr7x wrote
Future of medicine for the rich. Many, many life saving drugs will only ever be available in America/EU/Australia/Japan simply because it's not profitable to export to poorer countries. Not to mention the supply chain right now can barely supply rich regions with high demand drugs at the moment.
SilverNicktail t1_j07ic2z wrote
Gotta love the cynicism people can rustle up over "we can now cure CANCER".
Expensive to make *for a vaccine*, but is it cheaper than months or years of expensive and incredibly damaging cancer treatments?
[deleted] t1_j09tmvj wrote
[removed]
Gratzkul t1_j08x1fn wrote
I would sell myself into slavery for a cure to my daughters cancer.
burmerd t1_j0922mu wrote
I'm so sorry. I didn't anticipate a response like this, and I think maybe I shouldn't have posted anything.
Gratzkul t1_j092bce wrote
You shouldn’t apologize. You aren’t wrong. However, for many of us, there isn’t a price we wouldn’t pay for hope. No hard feelings, I know your comment wasn’t meant to be hurtful to anyone. Greed amongst corporations is a terrible thing.
Enk1ndle t1_j087kux wrote
Expensive is better than dead. It's no endgame but it's a hell of a start.
Neiladaymo t1_j07ziju wrote
I would just be happy to know the drug exists, because we can fight over making it accessible later.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments