California on the Path to make generic prescription drugs

[Serious]

SACRAMENTO, Calif.—California would become the first state to contract with generic-drug manufacturers to make prescription medicines to sell to residents, under a plan proposed by Gov. Gavin Newsom that aims to control rising health costs.

Mr. Newsom, a Democrat, said it will be part of his new budget proposal. Few details were provided about how the plan would work, what kind of drugs it would produce, how much it would cost to enact or how much it might save the state—things that are likely to be studied in more depth as debate over the state budget begins in the coming months.

But with a population of 40 million—nearly 1 in 3 of whom use the state’s Medicaid program for low-income people—Mr. Newsom is betting that California’s purchasing power can help it offer drugs at a lower price than they are offered commercially.

“A trip to the doctor’s office, pharmacy or hospital shouldn’t cost a month’s pay,” Mr. Newsom said. “These nation-leading reforms seek to put consumers back in the driver seat and lower health-care costs for every Californian.”

The proposal could find many supporters in the California legislature, where Democrats hold supermajorities in both houses.

The Association for Accessible Medicines, the trade group for generic drugmakers, said in a statement it is happy to work with Mr. Newsom’s administration on the proposal, but referred to challenges facing its members.

“If California enters the market itself, it will face the same market dynamics that have led to generic prescription drug price deflation in the past three years, as well as certain cases of patent abuse that have led to longer monopolies by select brand-name drugs,” the statement said.

Representatives for The Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, the branded drugmakers’ trade group, said it was reviewing the announcement and didn’t yet have a comment.

Related proposals announced by the governor include an expansion of an executive order he issued last year, which pooled drug purchases by state agencies to concentrate California’s buying power and bolster its negotiating position with drug companies. The latest changes Mr. Newsom has proposed would bring the state’s public employees’ purchasing entity as well as the state’s public health insurance exchange, Covered California, into the fold, and even invite private insurers to participate.

He is also seeking to authorize the California Department of Health Care Services to negotiate for the lowest drug prices offered to purchasers internationally, not just within the U.S. as is currently the case, meaning California could demand pricing competitive with countries such as Canada.

Mr. Newsom wants a single market for drug pricing in the state, proposing drugmakers bid to sell their products at a uniform price.

Rising generic-drug prices and shortages of some products have driven many states to seek greater control, especially as congressional efforts to make prescription drugs more affordable have stalled. More than three dozen states enacted laws to address prescription-drug pricing in 2019, up from 28 the year before and just 14 in 2017, according to the National Academy for State Health Policy.

“States are now leading the way in tackling healthcare costs,” Ronny Gal, a pharmaceutical analyst at Sanford C. Bernstein & Co. said.

Many lawmakers say high drug prices are hurting consumers and straining budgets for expenditures such as Medicaid and public-employee health insurance.

California has used the government to try to control prescription drug prices before. In 2017, the state enacted a law requiring drugmakers to provide a 60-day notice if they planned to increase the price of any drug by more than 16% over a two-year period. The law applies to drugs with a wholesale price of more than $40 for a 30-day supply.

Last year, Mr. Newsom signed a first-in-the-nation bill that barred companies that resolve patent disputes from agreeing to delay the launch of generic drugmakers’ lower-price copies.

The generic trade group, AAM, unsuccessfully asked a federal judge to block the law, and is appealing that decision.

Governments aren’t the only entities tackling the issue of unstable prices and supply. A coalition of hospitals established Civica Rx, a nonprofit venture that last year started distributing drugs through contracts with pharmaceutical manufacturers.

To save money, California will have to select drugs whose prices have risen substantially that are prescribed often, said Pratap Khedkar, who heads the pharmaceuticals practice at consulting firm ZS Associates. Too few drugs with low utilization “doesn’t actually translate into hundreds of millions of dollars to save, so you have to come up with the right trade-off,” he said.

Mr. Newsom’s uniform pricing proposal is similar to a plan from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. The Democrat has called for the federal government to negotiate prices for many of the most costly drugs in Medicare and the private market. The bill passed the House but has languished in the Republican-controlled Senate.

The pharmaceutical industry has increasingly gone to battle against state efforts to regulate the price of prescription drugs, including spending more than $109 million against a losing 2016 ballot measure that would have barred California from paying higher prices for drugs than the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, which often gets steep discounts.

Mr. Newsom also plans to propose the creation of a new Office of Health Care Affordability in the spring, he said, which would set cost targets for various health-care industry sectors and propose “financial consequences” if those targets aren’t met.

Mr. Newsom’s complete budget proposal for the 2020-2021 fiscal year, which begins in July, is expected to be released in full on Friday.

California Looks to Launch Its Own Prescription-Drug Label

@Rhakim @88m3 @FAH1223 @DEAD7 @dora_da_destroyer

 

[dora_da_destroyer]

I’m not paying for this

Either we go in as a nation or none of us do

 

[Strapped]

We will see how this plays out

 

[Professor Emeritus]

I was reading the book about Paul Farmer, Mountains Beyond Mountains, and there was this entire mind-blowing section in there about how his NGO (Partners in Health) revolutionized pricing for tuberculosis drugs and AIDS drugs so that millions more poor people got access. The shyt in there about what a racket it was and how a very small number of profit-seeking companies were keeping the prices high was incredible. Farmer just found the generics that were willing to make what he needed, scared the shyt out of the big companies at the same time who dropped prices or rolled out their own competitive options at the same time, and the entire market changed. No one used to believe that there would be antiretroviral drugs and second-line tuberculosis antibiotics available to poor people around the world, yet here we are.

If one little NGO could have that much pull and change the whole playing field, there's no reason that a giant market player like California couldn't do it.

 

[Serious]

I was reading the book about Paul Farmer, Mountains Beyond Mountains, and there was this entire mind-blowing section in there about how his NGO (Partners in Health) revolutionized pricing for tuberculosis drugs and AIDS drugs so that millions more poor people got access. The shyt in there about what a racket it was and how a very small number of profit-seeking companies were keeping the prices high was incredible. Farmer just found the generics that were willing to make what he needed, scared the shyt out of the big companies at the same time who dropped prices or rolled out their own competitive options at the same time, and the entire market changed. No one used to believe that there would be antiretroviral drugs and second-line tuberculosis antibiotics available to poor people around the world, yet here we are.

If one little NGO could have that much pull and change the whole playing field, there's no reason that a giant market player like California couldn't do it.

The US is pretty fukked up.

Everything about this country really boils down to profits over people. And the people with the most to gain hold a monopoly over industry. This type of control happens across the board from medicine to the transportation industry.

I got a couple books that break down how the health system in the US works and the fukkery involved with big pharma doesn't disappoint

On one hand I get why there's a monopoly on patents but on the other hand its fukked up to think about all the price gouging that goes on.

Then all the susceptible people that can't afford to get sick or how people's health ends up snowballing because they're forced to choose to between paying rent or medicine.

IDK how fukkers sleep at night.


I was watching this other day:

Basically dude makes what's equivalent to diabetes insulin with household products. It would only cost him $12 to make....

The median price for insulin in the US is like $500 /month and it keeps going up.

 

[DEAD7]

I’m not paying for this

Either we go in as a nation or none of us do

Nah this is good.
Allows us to see what the actual results will be while limiting any farm/failures that may occur. If it works then look at applying it everywhere

 

[DEAD7]

Drugs companies have been completely fukked by few bad actors.
People don’t wanna hear shyt.
For lefties it’s on sight big pharma...


Somethings gotta give.
Probably gonna be the heads of the people at the top.

I just hope we don’t damage/destroy the incentive to develop these life saving drugs. That’s all...

 

[Professor Emeritus]

Drugs companies have been completely fukked by few bad actors.
People don’t wanna hear shyt.
For lefties it’s on sight big pharma...


Somethings gotta give.
Probably gonna be the heads of the people at the top.

I just hope we don’t damage/destroy the incentive to develop these life saving drugs. That’s all...

If you look into it, big pharma does the initial research/development of relatively few of the most important life-saving drugs. Relatively small companies and government-funded departments do the large majority of important research. Big Pharma considers such long-term research projects too risky for their shareholders, instead they either buy up the rights to proven drugs that have already been developed, or spend most of the time messing around on the edges of rich-people problems (erectile dysfunction, depression, arthritis, etc.) that have a much broader and wealthier patient base than the shyt that's actually killing people. The one exception of course is cancer chemotherapy drugs, for which you can charge insane amounts of money even for treatments that lead to fairly limited improved long-term outcomes.

Of course drug companies will continue to make drugs to address those rich-people problems regardless. And the little companies and government outfits will continue working to address the big problems. So you have nothing to worry about.

 

[Meta Reign]

State sponsored opioids for everyone!

I don't trust the political culture in California to allow this be a good thing. The politics are much too liberal/evil to think that they won't be tossing out oxys and percs like candy under the guise of, "giving addicts the meds that they 'need'".

 

[PoorAndDangerous]

SOUNDS LIKE SOCIALISM TO ME! Why don't they just let sick people ration their insulin like any other sane state? Jesus christ these communists are relentless

 

[Secure Da Bag]

Socialfornia?

Honestly I think this will fail. Just like the UHC and Net neutrality bills before it. Too many corporate democrats in the legislature.

 

[DEAD7]

If you look into it, big pharma does the initial research/development of relatively few of the most important life-saving drugs. Relatively small companies and government-funded departments do the large majority of important research. Big Pharma considers such long-term research projects too risky for their shareholders, instead they either buy up the rights to proven drugs that have already been developed, or spend most of the time messing around on the edges of rich-people problems (erectile dysfunction, depression, arthritis, etc.) that have a much broader and wealthier patient base than the shyt that's actually killing people. The one exception of course is cancer chemotherapy drugs, for which you can charge insane amounts of money even for treatments that lead to fairly limited improved long-term outcomes.

Of course drug companies will continue to make drugs to address those rich-people problems regardless. And the little companies and government outfits will continue working to address the big problems. So you have nothing to worry about.

Just reform the patent system to only protect drugs developed privately.
No reason to give market exclusivity to a drug developed using tax payer dollars.

 

[88m3]

exciting

if it works hopefully it catches on

 

[ADevilYouKhow]

Just reform the patent system to only protect drugs developed privately.
No reason to give market exclusivity to a drug developed using tax payer dollars.

all of the drugs