Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Market Forces Alone Appear Insufficient To Promote Adequate Antibiotics Production


  • Please log in to reply
9 replies to this topic

#1 JMJones0424

JMJones0424

    412.63 ppm

  • Members
  • 1063 posts

Posted 18 May 2017 - 07:01 PM

https://arstechnica....s-is-all-about/

 

 

In one review of antibiotic shortages that occurred during 2011, researchers noted that 87 percent of the drugs in short supply were generics.

This scenario is particularly bad for children, who need specialized formulations containing smaller doses and sometimes liquid preparations. For antibiotics in limited access or supply, pediatric formulations are even harder to come by.

 



#2 Farming guy

Farming guy

    Explaining

  • Members
  • 550 posts

Posted 19 May 2017 - 12:30 PM

Does it seem to anyone else that greed is just increasing.  Are the drug companies just chasing after bigger profit margins?



#3 billvon

billvon

    Questioning

  • Members
  • 242 posts

Posted 19 May 2017 - 04:42 PM

Does it seem to anyone else that greed is just increasing.

I think greed has always been there.  Remember Love Canal - the Triangle Shirtwaist fire - Enron - Standard Oil - Bhopal - the purchase of Manhattan.  Heck, the Tulip Mania happened back in 1637 (the first market bubble, based purely on greed.)  It's been here as long as there have been people.



#4 Farming guy

Farming guy

    Explaining

  • Members
  • 550 posts

Posted 21 May 2017 - 03:56 PM

I think greed has always been there.  Remember Love Canal - the Triangle Shirtwaist fire - Enron - Standard Oil - Bhopal - the purchase of Manhattan.  Heck, the Tulip Mania happened back in 1637 (the first market bubble, based purely on greed.)  It's been here as long as there have been people.

True, greed has always been there, but this is a different type of greed.  Manufacturing inexpensive drugs is profitable,  but now apparently not profitable enough.  The examples you cited were of companies and people behaving badly, whereas now they are choosing simply not to do something that would still make money.



#5 billvon

billvon

    Questioning

  • Members
  • 242 posts

Posted 22 May 2017 - 01:33 PM

True, greed has always been there, but this is a different type of greed.  Manufacturing inexpensive drugs is profitable,  but now apparently not profitable enough.  The examples you cited were of companies and people behaving badly, whereas now they are choosing simply not to do something that would still make money

Right.  No one can do everything - so they have to pick and choose which things to work at; generally these are the things they can best/most reliably profit on.  I am sure you make the same sorts of decisions in your line of work.



#6 Farming guy

Farming guy

    Explaining

  • Members
  • 550 posts

Posted 23 May 2017 - 05:06 PM

Right.  No one can do everything - so they have to pick and choose which things to work at; generally these are the things they can best/most reliably profit on.  I am sure you make the same sorts of decisions in your line of work.

True enough, but I can remember when there was always someone willing to chase after the pennies that others wouldn't be bothered with.



#7 JMJones0424

JMJones0424

    412.63 ppm

  • Members
  • 1063 posts

Posted 25 May 2017 - 12:06 AM

Farming Guy- I don't have a deep enough understanding of the complicated US medical economy to say one way or the other.  It could be the case that some regulation that I am unaware of makes it less profitable for a pharmaceutical company to produce a needed but cheap antibiotic.  It could be the case that there simply aren't pharmaceutical companies willing to chase the pennies.  Regardless, my point is that there is a demonstrable failure in our system as it exists today.  While we spend far more per capita for healthcare compared to other developed countries, we are unable to supply necessary levels of basic, cheap antibiotics.



#8 Farming guy

Farming guy

    Explaining

  • Members
  • 550 posts

Posted 25 May 2017 - 07:48 PM

I was speaking to a friend recently who has a new dog, and the dog has been vaccinated for Lyme disease, and we both wondered why there is no vaccine for humans. Additionally, we vaccinate our dairy cows for E. Coli bacteria, and there is no such vaccine for humans of which I am aware. Why not?

#9 OceanBreeze

OceanBreeze

    Understanding

  • Members
  • 476 posts

Posted 26 May 2017 - 01:36 AM

I was speaking to a friend recently who has a new dog, and the dog has been vaccinated for Lyme disease, and we both wondered why there is no vaccine for humans. 

 

Probably because dogs don’t go to shyster lawyers and launch class action lawsuits against the pharmaceutical companies that make the vaccines. There has been a very good (80% effective) human vaccine against Lyme disease since 1998, but the anti-vaxxers and shyster lawyers forced it off the market. Is it any wonder the drug companies are in no rush to develop another one? By the way, I don’t think the drug companies are saints either, but I can understand their pov.



#10 mrg

mrg

    Questioning

  • Members
  • 159 posts

Posted 26 May 2017 - 06:38 AM

 By the way, I don’t think the drug companies are saints either, but I can understand their pov.

 

Yeah, I spent much of my life working for a big corporation, and such do plenty of dumb things.  However, Big Pharma is in a particularly difficult situation, being caught in a bind between cheap generic drugs, hostility from the Left and in particular antivaxxers / natural health geeks, and the need to make a profit or go out of business.   Couple to that the fact that it's not easy to come up with a particularly worthwhile new drug any more; the low-hanging fruit is gone.

 

As for shyster lawyers, they troll for opportunities to slam class-action suits on suckers.  I still get junk mail from shady law firms saying I should sign up for their class-action suit.  Yeah, so you can get a big fat settlement, and I get peanuts at best.   There's suckers on both ends.


Edited by mrg, 26 May 2017 - 06:50 AM.