Wednesday, July 13, 2016

Did Gilead's new Hepatitis drug Epclusa truly take $22.5 TRILLION to research?

At $75,000 a treatment, Epclusa, Gilead's new Hepatitis drug which miraculously cures all forms of Hepatitis, A, B, C, D, E, could cost about $500 billion to treat all 7 million Americans afflicted from some form of Hepatitis. Which would cost Gilead in the neighborhood of $1 billion to manufacture (figuring about $150 each for 7 million US patients -- if same as Sovaldi -- don’t have exact population figures in front of me but that that is what I call “close enough.”)

To justify that cost by the need to support research Gilead would have us believe they and others spend in the neighborhood of $499 billion on research on the average for each new drug that successfully comes to market.

But wait; there’s more — as the Popeil TV ads used to say.

Worldwide there are more like 300 million with chronic Hepatitis. Let’s see: 300 million X $75,000 = $22.5 trillion (with a "t") supposedly needed for research on average to bring one new drug (minus the 1/5 of one percent manufacturing costs -- let's be fair)?
 * * * * * * * * * * 
While Gilead ducks $10 billion in taxes.
 * * * * * * * * * *
Meantime back at the big pharma ranch:  

One striking chart shows why pharma companies are fighting legal marijuana         Christopher Ingraham, July 13
" They found that, in the 17 states with a medical-marijuana law in place by 2013, prescriptions for painkillers and other classes of drugs fell sharply compared with states that did not have a medical-marijuana law. The drops were quite significant: In medical-marijuana states, the average doctor prescribed 265 fewer doses of antidepressants each year, 486 fewer doses of seizure medication, 541 fewer anti-nausea doses and 562 fewer doses of anti-anxiety medication.

" But most strikingly, the typical physician in a medical-marijuana state prescribed 1,826 fewer doses of painkillers in a given year. "

" … pharmaceutical companies … have long been at the forefront of opposition to marijuana reform, funding research by anti-pot academics and funneling dollars to groups, such as the Community Anti-Drug Coalitions of America, that oppose marijuana legalization. "

No comments: