All prices shown in USD
Over the counter medication
Recent News
United States govt study probes "extraordinary" Rx price rises
January 12, 2009
Limited competition and a lack of therapeutically-equivalent drugs may be contributing to "extraordinary price rises" for branded medicines, a US government report claimed yesterday.
From 2000 to 2008, 416 brand-name medicines representing 321 different brands experienced "extraordinary" price rises, mainly ranging between 100%-499%, and during this period the number of such increases more than doubled every year, says the report, by Government Accountability Office (GAO) investigators.
28 brand-name drugs had extraordinary price increases in 2000, but for 2007 and 2008 the numbers were 74 and 71, respectively, and some products experienced several such increases. For 26 products, the price rises during 2000-2008 were greater than 1,000%, while the prices of seven went up by 500% or more "multiple times" during 2000-2008. The largest price increase revealed in the study was around 4,200%.
The 416 products represented just 0.5% of all brand-name drugs, and 52% of them were in just three therapeutic classes - central nervous system, anti-infective and cardiovascular, says the study.
The GAO conducted the report for Democratic Senators Charles Schumer and Amy Klobuchar, who serve on the House/Senate Joint Economic Committee - Sen Schumer is vice chairman - following a 2008 hearing by the Committee which drew attention to a number of small-market prescription drugs whose prices had risen by 100% or more at a single point in time.
The investigators' findings suggest that factors contributing to extraordinary price increases may include a lack of therapeutically-equivalent drugs - resulting from patent protection and market exclusivity, and the size of the drug's market - plus limited competition, says the report.
However, it also found that about half of the extraordinary price increases studied were for brand-name products that had been purchased from manufacturers or wholesalers and then repackaged and resold in smaller packages to hospitals, physicians and other providers. Moreover, 95% of repackaged drugs had an extraordinary price increase without a corresponding rise by the manufacturer for the identical nonrepackaged drug, says the report, although it adds: "some drug repackagers serve a niche in the drug market and therefore may have a small share of the market in a therapeutic class."
Link to original storyPrescription drugs: more business for Canadian online pharmacies?
February 27, 2009
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration still says "don't do it." The "it" being buying prescription drugs from Canadian - or any other foreign - online pharmacy. The official line is that if you're an American buying drugs online, you could be paying for:
- Counterfeit drugs.
- Medicine that's too strong or too weak.
- Drugs made in unsafe conditions.
- Drugs that are beyond their best-before date.
The FDA says there's nothing wrong with buying online, as long as the website is located in the United States, is licensed by the state board of pharmacy where the site is operating, has a licensed pharmacist on hand to answer your questions and requires a prescription from a doctor who is licensed to practice in the United States. But those guidelines didn't stop Americans from flooding Canadian online pharmacies with orders in the early years of the 21st century.
U.S. President Barack Obama's record $3.55 trillion US budget unveiled on Feb. 26, 2009, included a reference to supporting "the Food and Drug Administration's new efforts to allow Americans to buy safe and effective drugs from other countries." Couple that with a Canadian dollar that has fallen by 20 per cent over the past six months, and you might have a recipe for an increase in business for Canadian online pharmacies.
Why are drugs cheaper in Canada?
Aside from the exchange rate, price controls is the key factor that keeps the cost of brand-name drugs lower in Canada than in the United States. The Patented Medicine Prices Review Board, a quasi-judicial body of the government created in 1987, reviews pharmaceutical prices and enacts caps for patented drugs and medicines.
Another factor may be direct to consumer advertising. Only the United States and New Zealand allow drug companies to advertize their products directly to consumers. Critics of the practice say it drives people to higher-priced brand-name drugs when lower-cost generics are available. They also say the drug companies recoup their advertising expenses through higher drug prices.
The Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America - an organization representing the major pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies in the United States - says drug companies spent $4.8 billion US on direct-to-consumer advertising in 2006. The group says that's just a fraction of what the companies spend on research and development, so any effect on prices is minimal.
Details on how Americans will be encouraged to seek out cheaper drugs are expected to be known sometime in April 2009. But Canada may not be the only country to benefit. India has also entered the online pharmacy game.
Link to original storyIf you buy medicine through Medicare's prescription drug program, you could be paying too much.
March 25, 2009
David Goldstein - McClatchy Newspapers
The taxpayers who finance Medicare aren't doing too well, either.
Insurance companies involved in the Medicare prescription drug benefit have overcharged subscribers and taxpayers by several billion dollars, according to the inspector general for the Department of Health and Human Services. Eighty percent of the participating insurance companies owe the program an estimated $4.4 billion for 2006 alone.
Medicare, however, has been slow to do something about it. In fact, the agency doesn't even know how much money the insurance companies owe taxpayers because it hasn't begun most of the financial audits needed to determine that.
"It shows a mindset that could care less about wasting taxpayer money, that has no problem with padding profits of drug companies with hard-earned taxpayer dollars," said Sen. Claire McCaskill, a Missouri Democrat.
The program's nearly 27 million beneficiaries generally pay for the coverage, known as Medicare part D, through a monthly premium that's deducted from their Social Security checks. That and Medicare subsidies paid for by taxpayers pay for the $60 billion program.
For 2006, the first year of the program, Medicare was required to perform 165 audits. However, the inspector general found that, as of April, it had begun only seven, or 4 percent.
"I think they're not minding the store," said Paul Precht, director of policy for the Medicare Rights Center, a national nonprofit group that counsels Medicare subscribers. "I think that if there's a political will to hold the plans accountable, and if resources would be devoted to conducting these audits, you're going to get money back for the taxpayers."
Link to original story