Actually, insurance companies in the US play a similar role. Many insurance companies have agreements with pharmacies and drug companies to set a price for a drug. Then, at the insured level, they have a “formulary,” or a list of approved drugs on that insurance plan. For example, I have migraines. If I use the “approved” migraine medicine(s) on my plan, I only pay $10 for generic and $25 for name brand for that medicine. However, since the medication I use is “non-formulary”, I have to pay $50 for generic and much more for brand.
It’s a mess, but the real person who is screwed is one who doesn’t have health insurance. The person who can least afford it is most likely to pay full price for the drugs that he/she needs (but can’t afford due to exorbitant drug costs).
Sorry for the boring lesson but I thought I’d throw the insurance angle in there as well, just to confuse things further!
Well I am learning more and that is the whole point of this board I am still a liittle surprised that the canadian tax payer isn’t wearing some of the cost but I’m willing to take the concede to those who know better.
First, I need to say, I know jack shit about this, so what I say is out of ignorance. First: Not everyone lives on the US/Canada border, and can not just hop in the car to get their medicines.
Second: Assuming these drugs are the same chemicals, made by the same companies, what is the difference where they were bought? Aspirin is aspirin.
Third: Why is there such a big disparity in prices for the same thing?
It makes no sense to me.
Also, it’s a little known fact that Canadian drugs are subjected to higher levels of radiation from exposure to the northern lights than are their American counterparts. No one has ever examined the deleterious effects this may have on pharmaceuticals. So if you grow a third ear after taking some Canadian aspirin, the food and drug administration will have no way to tell if your mutation stemmed from bad manufacturing practices, or the interaction of a coronal mass ejection with earth’s magnetic field.
There is the issue of extended patent rights for pharmaceuticals. The government allows drug companies to maintain patent protection for an extended period. This eliminates the loss of revenue due to generic drugs arriving on the market.
If importation of Canadian drugs to the U.S. is allowed, and all of us rush out and get our prescriptions there, do Canadians run out of drugs for themselves? Would (or I guess I should say do) drug companies limit the quantity of drugs available in a specific country?
I’d really hate to have a bunch of sick Canucks looking angrily southward at us.
They shouldn’t. The drugs that are getting imported from Canada are actually re-imports. Meaning that the drugs were exported to Canada from the US and then they would be “re”-imported to the US. For that to be legal, Title 21 Ch 9 Sub 8 § 381 would have to be fixed to make that okay. (Or, the drug companies themselves would have to circumvent their own prices by reimporting the drugs from Canada.) The supply created by the US manufacturer would remain the same, its distribution between the two countries would shift have to Canada to keep it stocked there. Would the drug companies do that? Dunno. I would think that some sale would be better than no sale at all tho.
And I’ve proven that your assertation is a fallacy. The bus trips up I-29 (and really, talk about a boring drive) are happening because the FDA has chosen to “look the other way” within reason (nothing more than a 90 day supply, no narcotics, yadda yada). What the FDA is doing is creating an allowance contrary to what’s legally on the books per the US Code I’ve cited in this post and post 12. The bus trips, internet pages, et al are NOT loopholes to the law.
(An equivalent argument could be made that the police usually don’t stop someone from going one or two miles over the speed limit, however, that is still breaking the law.)
Wouldn’t you if you started a thread like this? He calls Edwards a lying douchebag for saying something that is essentially true, and then gets inflamed and pulls the “liberal bias” card when he’s called a lying douchebag for asserting Edwards’ lying douchebagness, based upon his partisan view of the truth…
Wait, what are we talking about again? Eh, fuck it. AFAIK, Edwards was 100% correct and Duffer is still a lying partisan douchebag.
duffer, you are such a dingbat. If your attempted political slams weren’t so incredibly clumsy and ham-handed they’d probably be annoying, but as it is I sometimes wonder if you aren’t actually a liberal mole in deep cover. (I wonder the same thing about some of the more extreme liberal posters at times.)
“No, see, it’s not an issue because everyone can just go to Canada every 90 days. Problem solved! Did I mention I live in North Dakota?”
calm kiwi The production cost of pharmaceuticals is trivial - a pill costs very close to nothing to produce. The costs are in the research, testing, development, getting all the approvals, etc. The price of a drug is the cost of the drug plus the amortized cost of development plus profit. Currently most countries use the collective clout of representing the entire nation’s healthcare system to negotiate a price acceptable to the drug company and the buyer. The US has no universal health care system and the government’s health care system is expressly forbidden from using its collective bargaining clout to negotiate better prices. As a result the US market ends up doing most of the subsidizing of the research end of the pharmaceutical industry. Whatever sales are realized outside the US are mostly profit.
Nope, didn’t slip out the back door. As I said in another thread it’s harvest time and I’m putting in 12-18 hour days. Time is tight.
I also said the wording of the OP was harsh. I’d apologize again, but it won’t do any good.
The way I understood his statement was that ANY form of buying drugs in Canada was illegal. As pointed out in another post, apparently it is, in fact, illegal. Learn something new everyday. I was going by what actually happens, and it seems the Custom’s agents are turning a semi-blind eye to it. As I’ve never had to do it and it’s generally looked upon, at least here, as legal, well maybe you can see where I thought it was legal.
Anyway, it was posted in haste and not well crafted. Though it did teach me something about some posters.
As long as I’m here, I learned something about Blue Cross last week. We have to do* in vitro* and got the list of drugs we’ll need. (This frigging kid better not give me any shit, we’re talking close to 20 grand)
When I was calling pharmacies for prices (80% is covered) they could only give me the cash price. I asked what the price would be under our insurance and every one of them told me they had to wait to see what BC/BS would pay.
Yes, I know some people don’t have coverage, but those of us that do, have collective bargaining in place. BC/BS pretty much tells the pharmacy what the cost is going to be.
Maybe it won’t do any good because it’s not the wording people are calling you out for. It’s the content of the message under all the bullshit and harsh wording. You were wrong. You are still wrong. It is still illegal to order drugs from Canada, and the president still wants it to remain illegal.
Nice smokescreen. Just because Customs Agents allow small amounts of oldsters to cross the border in search of cheaper drugs and turn a blind eye to it does not invalidate the fact that it’s still illegal. It was a simple argument from a simple person.
Instead of parsing the post,** READ IT!!** What the fuck more do you want? I admitted I was wrong and explained where I went wrong with it. Then you come back and give me more shit AFTER I RETRACTED THE ASSERTION!
If you hate me so much, hit ignore. You’re obviously trying to hit me for the sake of doing so. It’s a dead issue. I was wrong in how I interpreted it. I’m a douchebag. I’m an asshole. I’m an idiot. Fuck’s sake, what more do you need to feel better about yourself.
Boy I sure am sick and tired of people not taking responsibility for their words and actions. That would include miss-stating “why” they were wrong in the first place. That is also why I decided to make a point of it in my reply to you.
Read what I wrote instead of parsing it, duffer.
When offering an apology(not needed), or a retraction(needed), don’t try covering up WHY you were wrong with misdirection like “I was wrong because I didn’t craft my purposfully misleading and factually incorrect partisan rant against the Democrats correctly”. It wasn’t an issue of language used that pissed people off.
Sam
P.S.- I don’t hate you, I’m not sure where you got that impression. I personally think your positions on lots of issues suck, but that’s an opinion I don’t expect everyone to hold-and that’s politics for ya! I also think you open your mouth before you think of what you say, hence this thread.
I am still a liittle surprised that the canadian tax payer isn’t wearing some of the cost but I’m willing to take the concede to those who know better.
