FTR, Epipen twin-packs in Canada have been about CAD $100 for years and remain at that price today. They are the exact same Epipens made my Mylan, distributed in Canada by Pfizer. The major reason prices remain stable is price regulation by the Patented Medicine Prices Review Board. Heather Bresch and Mylan seem to have no problem making a profit on them at that price instead of USD $600.
Isn’t it about time for some avuncular scolding from some tighty righty, reminding us that the very purpose of a corporation is to produce profit? “What you silly liberals don’t seem to understand is that corporations are obliged to produce profit, it is their responsibility to the investors and shareholders!”. Corporadoes are good citizens too, and they agonize over their decisions, fretting and worrying that they are not being good Americans.
But then they remind themselves that what’s good for business is good for America, because America is business! That what Americans…real Americans!..truly want is The Business, and they are obliged to give it to us, good and hard! Not because they want to, of course not! But stern duty demands it!
So what if there is no emergency room closer than, say, thirty minutes? Have you neglected to teach your child how to exchange gases by osmosis, and absorb the needed oxygen through their skin? Well, who’s fault is that?
You can find those arguments all over Reddit right now. It seems to be a minority opinion, though.
In a free market, one company would not be able to control another’s use of its property. IOW, until you get rid of intellectual “property” laws, there will not be a free market.
Correct. Having had epi in several doctors’ offices, hospitals, and, yes, an ambulance, I know from personal experience that it’s a bottle and syringe.
So “free market” = “anarchy”?
Mr. Farnaby is broken. He does not understand reality, let alone economic theory.
Intellectual property creates monopolies to encourage innovation. Mylan didn’t innovate and crate the epipen, they purchased the patent (value based in the income stream from cheap epipens) and then jacked up the price because, why the fuck not.
Hayek cautioned against overly long patent periods.
Epipens were developed 30 years ago for the military. Which is weird because we didn’t invade Iraq and have to deal with potential chemical attack until a year or two after that, its not like we invade Grenada and said “holy shit, you know what we really needed? An autoinjector incase of chemical attacks, lets get one of our contractors on that right now!”
So discourage monopolies rather than encourage anarchy. With no intellectual property laws, there would be no innovation. Why bother to invent something when any random mook can come along and claim it?
I think you’ll find invention predates intellectual property laws 
And intellectual property laws are necessary for our modern, wealthy and extremely inventive nations.
If in certain areas of the country we can have Rent Control, where prices on a life-sustaining necessity may only increase a certain percentage per year, and given that this drug is a life sustaining necessity, why can’t it be price controlled the same way?
Price increases could be limited to a range between 3-5% per year, and be required to be approved by a simple majority of Both Houses of Congress annually… or by a Special Committee. based upon the application made by the Pharmaceutical Company by a specified annual filing date.
Because that’s what’s done in those socialist foreign countries, you see. What do you have against America?
I’m fighting a secret war against Martin Shkrelli and the Agents of S.M.I.R.K.*
*****
Smirking
Manboys
Idolizing
Ridiculous
Kleptomania
No, you know from experience that it’s the case in some instances.
Another poster said that in their experience, they’ve never seen anything other than the name brand EpiPen, so that alone will tell you that your experience isn’t as wide reaching as you claim.
I have no particular opinion on the EpiPen fiasco but price regulations often make things worse. To use your example: rent control is largely condemned by economists as counter-productive.
Any form of regulation has the potential to make things worse, and so does insufficient regulation. So what do you propose?
ISTM that regulation simply needs to be justifiable and rational. The Patented Medicine Price Review Board in Canada has prevented gouging on many essential drugs, and most recently prevented the EpiPen fiasco from spilling over into Canada, where they remain around $100 per pack of two (actually less, in US dollars). There are no shortages because it turns out, unsurprisingly, that Heather Bresch is quite delighted to sell for CAD $100 a product that costs about 30 cents to make, though not quite as delighted as selling it for $600. And, despite price controls, Canada has a thriving pharmaceutical research and manufacturing industry.
Artificial price controls almost never work (I can’t think of any that have). The problem is that by their very nature they create shortages. It might appear to work in Canada because the number of Canadians taking the drug is small compared to the number of Americans.
I got the vial-and-syringe both times I had a severe allergic reaction, once in an ambulance and once in an ER. So his experience was not unique.
Frankly, I wouldn’t be surprised to encounter either method.
And in the latest idiocy, Mylan has decided to launch a generic version of the epi-pen listing at $300.
link
So instead of just lowering their price to $300, they are going to the expense of developing all new packaging material and reshipping the exact same product under a new label for $300. Presumably, they are still making a profit at this price. But by maintaining the brand-name price at $600, they can still collect more than that from the combination of insurance contracts and patient copays, especially since the patient copay cards will be no good on the generic, so patients will go for the brand-name medication, at least until their insurance companies start to mandate the generic.