Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Clown-Free Zone... sorry, no clowns allowed -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: benwood who wrote (100742)	5/8/2001 9:08:48 PM
From: patron_anejo_por_favor	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 436258

<< that doesn't say anything about inflation of individual prescription drug prices;>> This one does, though: usatoday.com Prescription drug costs rise by $21B By Julie Appleby, USA TODAY The USA's prescription drug tab rose by nearly $21 billion last year, with just 23 drugs responsible for more than half the spending increase. Retail spending on drugs jumped 19%, to $132 billion in 2000, with treatments for arthritis, depression, cholesterol and ulcers among those leading the way, a study out today shows. The average retail price per prescription rose 10.5% to $45.27, according to the study. The study reflects a 5-year trend toward higher prescription-drug spending that has employers scrambling to reduce their share of drug costs, often by shifting more payments to workers or encouraging the use of lower-cost generic drugs. "Most of us are blinded to these increases because we have generous insurance coverage for drugs, but that's changing rapidly," says report author Steven Findlay of the non-profit National Institute for Health Care Management in Washington. Drug spending is driven by three factors: an increase in prescriptions written; a rise in individual prescription costs; and a shift to more expensive drugs from older, or generic, products, the study found. For example, arthritis sufferers taking prescription-strength ibuprofen might pay $60 or less for a month's supply, says C. Daniel Mullins, an associate professor at the University of Maryland, who did not work on today's report. But if they switch to one of the new arthritis medications, Celebrex or Vioxx, a month's supply jumps to $80 or more, he says. Among 50 drugs that contributed most to the spending increase, the average price per prescription was $75.88, the study found. Those drugs were also often the most heavily marketed. For example, the top four drugs on that list are also among the 10 most heavily marketed to doctors: Vioxx and Celebrex; cholesterol drug Lipitor; and ulcer drug Prevacid. The drug industry spent $479 million on ads in physician journals and in sales calls promoting those four drugs alone, according to data from IMS Health, a firm that tracks the drug industry. "I think this tells the story that advertising works," says Stephen Schondelmeyer, a professor of pharmaceutical economics at the University of Minnesota. The drug industry says the study shows that prescriptions remain a good value and questioned whether the study's backers have a vested interest in cost cutting. "While cost containment is important, we believe that prescription drugs have been proven the most cost-effective treatment for many illnesses," says Alan Holmer of the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America. Findlay says the foundation's finances had no influence on the study's results. The foundation is supported by grants from government and private sponsors and funds from 11 Blue Cross/Blue Shield insurers. Over the course of the "lifetime" of a given drug, it's retail cost is usually highest in real terms as soon as it's first approved. This is due to patent protection and lack of competition. Over time, as competitors pop up, prices usual decline; nonetheless it is an absolute that Americans are spending more on prescription drugs. The largest cost input to the end consumer of drugs is marketing costs, followed by research. Of course, the real questions are: Are the increased expenditures (on drugs) reducing expenditures in other segments of health care? If not, has the presumed increased quantity and quality of life gained by the increased cost incurred for the drugs been worth the price? That question hasn't been answered definitively by anyone (and may not be answerable, unless you consult the Iron Chef hedonic book-cookers at the BLS)....