Write your senators and Congressman

[lbeachbum2]

Just a question how does a drug (Thalidomide)
that was developed over 50 years ago , and giving out to pregnant women like candy at a normal cost ,,, come back with a new name as Revlimid that now cost $8000 per month ,,,, what kind of development cost could there bee for a drug that was banned ???? this is a travesty that the drug company’s take advantage of dyeing cancer patients …. we must all write our congressmen ….. Our family’s work too hard as caregivers , for then to go into bankruptcy so that a drug company can pay its ” Healthy ” shareholders ,,a more then a Healthy dividend this is our blood money ………… Mike11561@aol.com

[gemloyear]

Mike, You’re so right. Twenty years ago I worked at a group home for developmentally disabled people and saw first hand the horror which drugs did. The current drugs being put on the market are also doing more harm than many people realize. As carefull as we are with medications we have had problems with serious side effects from many meds. When a person has an incurable illness one needs to take a certain amount of risk in hopes of some relief. I feel we are pretty much at the mercy of the drug companies. Sorry I’m feeling just a little bitter right now, knowing that my husband is suffering and there really isn’t much that can be done for him.
Ellie

[Dennis]

You have to bear in mind a couple things.

First, to bring a drug to market costs a small fortune, because of the testing and research that goes into it. Much of that cost is mandated by laws and rules brought about by those very congressmen.

Second, diseases like MDS have relativly small populations, so the costs of development, which are nearly the same for any drug, have to be recouped from a smaller group — hence, the drug costs more.

Now, I’m not saying this to justify huge profits. I have to take vidaza, which is $28,000 billed to my ins. company every cycle == 8 times a year now. If it weren’t for that vidaza or other drug like it, I would be getting a transfusion every couple weeks, and might even be dead by now, since all three cell lines were depressed.

All the companies have programs to help with costs for those who don’t have insurance or have less than adequate insurance.

Profits are not necessarily evil. It was the potential for profit that led to the development of Vidaza. Had the drug failed its trials, those profits could just has well have been company-killing losses.

If you look at places where there is no possibility of significant profit in relation to the significant risk, there is little or nothing done for MDS patients, other than “supportive care”.

Yes, thalidomide has been around a while. But in Revlimid, it’s in a different form that did not exist then. It had to be developed, and tested.

No doubt it is unfortunate that this stuff has to cost so much. But someone paid those researchers to labor for years to find something. Where does that money come from?

It pains me to see the money spent on my medical care. But consider the alternative. No vidaza, no me. And how many others is it helping? Would the drug companies, who have to pay their researchers and workers well before they can realize one red cent from the product’s sale be expected to do it for nothing? It’s not a perfect system, but it does work.

Dennis

[patti]

Dennis,

That is very well said. It’s a delicate balance, isn’t it? My struggle with the medical world these days is two fold. One, that they refuse to recognize the value of natural medicine and therefore pay for it and two, that insurance companies can deny coverage if a person has had anything happen to them. I’ve been denied coverage by 5 insurance companies because I had gestational diabetes with my last pregnancy. Rather than just deny me future coverage if I were to become diabetic (which would be fine with me) they just turn me down flat. It used to be that if a company didn’t way to pay for something they would “exclude” it from your insurance coverage. That is a system I have no idea how to influence or fix. Somehow, I don’t think government involvement is the answer. But you are right, profits are not evil. If they were, my husband and I wouldn’t have a business. What would be the purpose if you can’t be profitable?

You do a good job speaking clearly and making something that’s very complicated more understandable. Aand I got to stand on my soap box for my beefs for a minute.

patti

[Author]

Posts