BenefitsAll

Big Pharma

We Must Fight Against The Health Care Status Quo's Propaganda War on Medicare For All


No one could read the statistics about our broken health care system and walk away thinking it just needs a few tweaks. But that's exactly what the marketing and public relations arms of the health care industry status quo wants us to think. The campaign to push back on Medicare For All (M4A), Medicare Buy-In, and any kind of universal health care program that competes with the for-profit health care system is in full swing. What these ads lack in originality they make up for in gall. But if history is any guide, millions of health care consumers will fall for the health care status quo's economic propaganda.

Health Care Industry Anti-Medicare For All Ads Are Pathetic

Social and other media outlets are currently awash in anti-Medicare For All ads, funded by health care organizations and other businesses.

The Partnership for America's Health Care Future (P4AHCF), recently sent out a tweet warning of a
future of high prices, low quality, and fewer health plan choices under Medicare For All. (Someone should tell them that the future is now.)


And there's more. The P4HCF's web site has this to say about our current health care system.

"While our current system is not perfect - we know there are many parts of it that are working well for patients across the country. And thanks to ongoing progress, we can continue to build upon and protect the parts of this system that work well - while improving up the parts that do not."

Aside from the strange "improving up the parts" wording, The Partnership's using the tried and tested tactic of holding up the employer-sponsored health insurance market as a model of success. It's not, and it deserves an honest response.

Employer provided health insurance is not a success, it is not a
part of the system that works well, and it is not relatively inexpensive as some may think. Employment-based plans receive favorable tax treatment that limit what employees pay, as well as subsidies from the employer. That $1,200 annual premium that the employee pays may receive a subsidy of over $4,800 from these two sources, leaving the employee with the false belief that their health plan is inexpensive. Health care spending in America consumes over 18% of the country's gross domestic product (GDP). It is not inexpensive. Continue Reading...
Comments

EpiPen--Price Gouging Made Easy


Fortunately, I do not need an EpiPen. However, I live with someone who does. Less than 10 years ago he paid about $25 for one EpiPen; Today, he pays $250. Also, he’s forced to purchase two EpiPens at a time because of new FDA guidelines and subsequent changes by the drug manufacturer. That doubles the price to $500.

So why is the price of the EpiPen increasing when a vial of hormone epinephrine cost just $1? Political connections and sophisticated, target marketing.

Bloomberg has an excellent article on how Mylan Pharmaceuticals purchased EpiPen when it was bringing in about $200 million a year, The CEO of Mylan, Heather Bresch (formerly, Heather Manchin), is a U.S. Senator’s daughter. Through lobbying of the federal government (my assessment, not Bloomberg’s) and extensive marketing by outside experts, she and Mylan turned EpiPen into a $1 billion a year product. A look at Bresch’s profile on the Mylan website basically confirms that more EpiPen price increases are in the future as Mylan aims to reach its 2012-2018 earnings goals. And then there’s this...

A Little More About Heather Bresch

Bresch claimed she had an MBA degree she did not have and used her connections and influence to perpetuate this falsehood. She later backed away from the claim but only after a drawn out, public scandal. This is relevant to the story of how the price of this drug increased so rapidly in the hands of someone with political connections and is not afraid to use them. Heather Bresch is politically brilliant and she knows as much about pharmaceutical laws, regulations and guidelines as anyone (mostly because she studies these laws, has access to the people who write them and helps draft some herself).

The point – Heather Bresch heading Mylan Pharmaceutical Company is like placing a pharmaceutical lobbyist at the head of a pharmaceutical company. Knowledgeable—check. Connected—check. Price gouging protector—check. Continue Reading...

Comments

Can You Purchase Prescription Medication From Abroad Like Maria Sharapova?

blogEntryTopper

I’m a big fan of professional tennis. Like many tennis fans this week I was eager to hear the scheduled announcement on Monday by one of the biggest stars in the game, Maria Sharapova. Here announcement that she failed a mandatory drug test at the first tennis major of the year, the Australian Open, was a disappointing surprise. Maria admitted taking a drug since 2006 that was just recently banned (January 1, 2016) by the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA).

The drug is called meldonium (aka mildronate) and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) does not approve it—which mean it is not available by prescription in the U.S. But Maria is not an American citizen. She’s a Russian citizen who received her tennis training in the U.S. as a young child and owns several homes here. According to her announcement about the incident, her family physician prescribed meldonium to her to address several health issues.

The questions everyone’s asking now are:

  • Where is her physician’s practice based?
  • Where does she get the drug?
  • Does she import the drug from a country where it is legal to the U.S.?
  • Has the drug ever been administered to her in the U.S. in the ten (10 years) she’s been using it?
  • Did she notify the FDA she was importing the drug and as a non-citizen did she have to?
Maria and her lawyers will eventually provide answers to most of these questions to the International Tennis Federation. In the meantime, I’m interested to see if Maria’s revelations will spark a national conversation about American citizens importing prescription drugs. Currently, it is illegal for Americans to do so, but there is an exception. According to the FDA, Americans may be able to import drugs (not guaranteed) if they meet all of the following conditions:

  • if the intended use is for a serious condition for which effective treatment may not be available domestically
  • if the product is not considered to represent an unreasonable risk
  • if the individual seeking to import the drug affirms in writing that it is for the patient's own use and provides the name and address of the U.S.-licensed doctor responsible for his or her treatment with the drug or provides evidence that the drug is for continuation of a treatment begun in a foreign country
  • if the product is for personal use and is a three-month supply or less and not for resale, since larger amounts would lend themselves to commercialization
  • if there is no known commercialization or promotion to U.S. residents by those involved in distribution of the product

We Need More Drug Importation Ban Exceptions Continue Reading...
Comments