Hepatitis C Drug to Cost $1000 Per Day

[Achilleslastand]

Hepatitis C Drug to Cost $1000 Per Day

Scientists have discovered a miracle Hepatitis C drug that can cure 90 percent of affected persons within 3 months. However, the only setback of this new discovery is the fact that it will cost $1,000 per day. The shocking price has generated huge debates in the biotechnology fraternity as some lawyers and insurance companies believe that the manufacturers of the miracle drug are only interested in exploiting their clients financially.

The new drug popular known as Sovaldi might provide a lasting solutions for patients of this disease especially at a time like this when most doctors are finding it hard to get an effective drug. Some critics now claim that Gilead Sciences (GILD) is taking advantage of the situation to sell their new drug at a whopping $1000 per day. According to analysts, the company has witnessed a massive increase of its shares to around 53 percent in a span of one year alone. This is a true indication of the kind of profits it makes by selling the drug at such shocking rates. Analysts also predict that the company could earn a profit of $7 to $10 billion in sales this year alone.

According to health statistics, more than 3 million Americans are said to be suffering from Hepatitis C. Most of them have been infected with this virus through intravenous drug usage. Before the invention of Sovaldi, patients relied on various treatment methods such as interferon injections. As a result, they would experience severe flu-like symptoms and that is why some of them decided to avoid the drug.

Insurance companies will also be affected by the arrival of this expensive drug. According to Mario Molina, the head of Molina Healthcare, the earnings could drop by 18 percent if every Hepatitis C patient in the U.S. is treated using this new drug. Forbes reports that the tab would reach a massive $227 billion, yet the total amount of money spent on all drugs in the U.S. is approximately $260 billion.

The medical fraternity is under immense pressure to dismiss the drug but this seems quite impossible. Some patients do not mind buying it as long as they will be totally cured three months later. Sovaldi has very few side effects compared to other drugs that are specifically meant to cure this disease and for that reason, its popularity continues to rise every day.

Gilead Sciences has defended itself against the accusations of exploiting their patients financially. The company argues that, in fact, this drug is cheaper because it has the potential to cure the patients within three months. This is relatively cheaper than seeking other long and expensive treatment methods. Hepatitis C causes both liver cirrhosis and cancer.

As a result of the rising pressure from citizens, insurance companies and lawmakers, Gilead has explained that the cost of the Hepatitis C drug is based on a country’s per capita income. For example, patients in the U.K will have to pay around $57,000, Germans need $66,000 and $84,000 for Americans for a full dose.

[Plutonic Panda]

It's their drug, so it's their choice to make.

[fromdust]

That's alright, I'm sure Obamacare will pick up the tab?....

[zookeeper]

It's their drug, so it's their choice to make.

And if the manufacturer of one of the last line of defense antibiotics against these superbugs that are found right here at every hospital in Oklahoma City (MRSA for example), began charging $10,000 per tablet, you would feel the same way? If it was your mother? Father? YOU?

Developing a drug to save lives and then profit in an obscene way is one word: Evil.

I realize the drug in the original post is made overseas, but many drugs in the USA that are so expensive were first discovered, developed, and tested using taxpayer money and the use of NIH research facilities, etc. Yet, the private company involved is allowed to patent it and hold sick people ransom. Don't let the "assistance programs" fool you, it DOES happen.

I'm so sorry to see this country has become such a materialistic and consumerist society, that young people like Plutonic Panda accept this kind of ransom as a normal part of living in a "free market."

I believe in a world where you develop medicine to make people healthy. Period. I believe in a world where we would see any other reason as irrational and sickening.

[betts]

Yes and the doctor who administers it will get $25 for the office visit from Medicare. It's not doctors who are causing the monetary health care crisis.

[Just the facts]

I wonder what the price would be if the only source of income to the drug maker was the patients ability to pay for it out of their own pocket. I imagine it would be a lot less than $1,000 per day. I wonder what a hamburger would cost if everyone paid for a hamburger using a 3rd party payers.

[hoya]

Well, while $1000 a day sounds absolutely ridiculous, you're looking at being cured for $90,000.

I go back and forth on this. I mean theoretically we could now eradicate Hep C just like we did with Smallpox. Yes, it would cost $227 billion, but then it's just gone, and you never have to do it again. And in 20 years the patent for it will expire, dropping the cost significantly.

Yeah it seems pretty scummy to charge exorbitant amounts for a life saving treatment, but I'd rather they develop it and charge a fortune than not develop it. Of course my choice would be to have them charge a more reasonable amount out the gate, but I understand their "get it while the getting is good" mentality. And yeah if it was my mother I'd be pissed, but if it's my (as yet nonexistent) daughter, I'd be happy, because the drug is gonna be super cheap in 2036 when some guy named Slash gives her the disease in the back of his van.

[Plutonic Panda]

I stand by my original comment. If I came out with a cure for HIV tomorrow- that cure would be my property, and I would choose how much it would cost for people to use it. If I wanted it to cost $100,000 a day it would. Outraged? That's fine, you can create you own cure when you get the chance.

Now I'm not claiming I'd do that, but it is my choice to make and rightfully so.

[hoya]

And if the manufacturer of one of the last line of defense antibiotics against these superbugs that are found right here at every hospital in Oklahoma City (MRSA for example), began charging $10,000 per tablet, you would feel the same way? If it was your mother? Father? YOU?

I have a cousin who got MRSA while she was in the hospital for something else. Her medical bills were several hundreds of thousands and they had to amputate her hands and feet. We thought she was going to die. If there was (say) a 10 day cure that cost $10,000 a pill, it would be much cheaper than what she went through. She's also going to be on disability for the rest of her life, and this theoretical treatment would have prevented that. Of course we would all have grumbled about the pill that cost 6 bucks to manufacture that costs as much as a used car. But I'd take it over the alternative.

I believe in a world where you develop medicine to make people healthy. Period. I believe in a world where we would see any other reason as irrational and sickening.

We've had incredible advances in medicine over the last 30 years or so. We are paying through the nose for them, but boy is it impressive. Prescription drug research is a gold mine. It may make us uncomfortable, and it's probably not sustainable. I don't think we'll be able to afford another 30 years of going down this path. I think eventually we'll see a lot of regulation of this industry. But there have been benefits to it.

[Just the facts]

I don't know about you guys, but I consider my life worth $90,000. People spend that much just for 10 year worth of transportation.

[Plutonic Panda]

I don't know about you guys, but I consider my life worth $90,000. People spend that much just for 10 year worth of transportation.

Hell, I'd hope you wouldn't put a price on your life.

[Just the facts]

Hell, I'd hope you wouldn't put a price on your life.

Is $10,000 enough?

[venture]

I stand by my original comment. If I came out with a cure for HIV tomorrow- that cure would be my property, and I would choose how much it would cost for people to use it. If I wanted it to cost $100,000 a day it would. Outraged? That's fine, you can create you own cure when you get the chance.

Now I'm not claiming I'd do that, but it is my choice to make and rightfully so.

While I get what you are saying about it being your right, at some point though humanity needs to take care of each other - not filling the bank account. If these people can live with themselves pricing people out of getting a cure, that is on them.

[kelroy55]

I'll hold out until the patent is up and get the off brand one

[BBatesokc]

People are free to complain about the price all they want..... but I didn't see any humanitarian drug companies coming forward with the cure. Capitalism is often the sole motivator for such advances.

I know people that are Hep C+ and they will never be able to afford this drug - but they, as with most of those infected, contracted the disease from their illegal drug use. Sorry, but I'm not overly sympathetic with their dilemma.

I hope some of you have enough fingers and toes to point them at every individual and industry that fits your definition of unnecessarily enriching themselves off of others.

[Plutonic Panda]

While I get what you are saying about it being your right, at some point though humanity needs to take care of each other - not filling the bank account. If these people can live with themselves pricing people out of getting a cure, that is on them.

I agree with you. Which is why I said, I wouldn't charge the hell out of people if ever came out with a cure, I would make sure I got paid for it, but I would be more than generous with it.

[Achilleslastand]

Can you imagine if a company was to come up with a cure for Hiv/Aids and wanted to charge 100,000 for treatment. I bet there would be an uproar especially from the LGBT community and rightly so.

[BBatesokc]

Can you imagine if a company was to come up with a cure for Hiv/Aids and wanted to charge 100,000 for treatment. I bet there would be an uproar especially from the LGBT community and rightly so.

I'd argue it wasn't that long ago (1980's) that only the rich were able to get often life saving medical attention needed to combat an HIV infection.

[Mr T]

My little brother Tommy got Hep C from a blood transfusion in the early 80s. He worked for Caltrans and a road they were grading collapsed. His hand was amputated. He was diagnosed in the early 90s. He was on the first Interferon trial - the one that didn't really work. He couldn't do the second one because it would skew the results - if he got better which one was responsible? He was on the transplant list in California from the late 90s until 2005, when he went in for the surgery and died of MRSA. He had been admitted many times before but he kept getting better and being sent home. He was with the doctors at St. Vincent in California, the ones who got in trouble for misallocation of a liver, back in later 2005. One of the doctors wanted to apply to move him up based on length of time listed but the other said no. By the time he got within 48 hours from death and stayed there he was on his tertiary systems, not like a young person who overdoses on Tylenol.

I guess no matter how you add it, the $90,000.00 for the medication is cheaper than any of the alternatives except the ice floe, certainly cheaper than the transplant and lifetime drugs. In addition to that, you could be cured in plenty of time to enjoy your years, not just hang around on the list dying not quite fast enough.

[Bunty]

I stand by my original comment. If I came out with a cure for HIV tomorrow- that cure would be my property, and I would choose how much it would cost for people to use it. If I wanted it to cost $100,000 a day it would. Outraged? That's fine, you can create you own cure when you get the chance.

Now I'm not claiming I'd do that, but it is my choice to make and rightfully so.

Yeah, you sure don't want to price a drug that cures, or prevents, so low that everybody that has the disease gets cured. No one is making money treating polio these days.

[td25er]

I would have a huge problem if this required lifetime treatment. This is a temporary cost. Surgeries can run in the hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars. The company is a business. I'm sure they have lost millions (billions?) on research and other failed drugs. They have to make some money some how. They are capitalizing on a winner. When the generics come out, everybody will win.

[Plutonic Panda]

Yeah, you sure don't want to price a drug that cures, or prevents, so low that everybody that has the disease gets cured. No one is making money treating polio these days.

My point remains valid.

[zookeeper]

My point remains valid.

Which is a damn shame. Maybe someday we'll see a brighter world than the rush to dollars as so many in this thread believe is paramount. God Bless America.

[Plutonic Panda]

Zookeeper, would a perfect world be perfect? We have good people who don't patent their drugs in order to keep the cost low and we have others that see profit in it.

Should we really blame the people that pioneer these medical marvels and charge for it or should we blame society for allowing this to happen?

Who makes the money which people become addicted to? How did the person contract hepatitis c in the first place? Who makes the expensive merchandise and real estate that cause people to want money?

[bluedogok]

A company developing drugs can also spend $100-200 million of their own or investors money trying to develop a viable medicine and just get it into the clinical trials only to have it fail to work or not get approved by the FDA. I was working with a bio-tech company in Austin that had already burned through $250 million before we got on board to design and build a pharmaceutical manufacturing building for clinical trial medication. This facility would make a fraction of the medicine required for full scale production but the FDA requirement is to build it as if it is a full production facility, validation for this small plant was estimated to be in the $5-10 million range. Development costs are the only large expenditure, meeting the requirements of the government is another large cost item. Given the limited window of exclusivity I can understand why they are trying to recover R&D costs in that time frame, any investor expects that to happen. Exploration of the unknown is expensive and is littered with failures, there has to be a way to recoup those costs or else the research at the scale we are used to will not happen.

It isn't just medicines either as blood product is expensive as well. I am receiving hemoglobin every three weeks, that is about $4,500 for every infusion session. Just my hospital stay in January was billed out at $170,000 (not what we and the insurance company paid).