Free Newsletter
U.S. drug spending tops the globe
Quick now: Which country's consumers spend the most money on prescription drugs? You got it. U.S. patients shelled out an average of $792 each for their meds in 2005, almost double the overall average among all industrialized countries.
That average was $401, a number that not only depends on drug prices, but on per capita consumption of them. So while France and Spain paid below-average prices, their drug spending came in at third and fourth place--with $515 and $509, respectively--because their citizens use more meds. And though the U.S. posted the highest per capita spending, the highest actual prices were found in Iceland and Switzerland, where the price tags beat the average by almost 50 percent.
The rest of the countries' rankings--and tons more data--can be found in a 200-page report, Pharmaceutical Pricing Policies in a Global Market, from the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).
Interestingly, it wasn't the countries with pricing regulation that boasted the lowest prices, OECD found. Some price regulators tend to balance cost concerns with public health policies and so forth, which can hold prices higher than in other places where the market sets the price. So, OECD concludes, there's room for governments to drive a harder bargain for the pharmaceuticals they regulate.
- read the OECD release
- see the article at Seeking Alpha
Related Articles:
Congress decries drug price-gouging
Obama, McCain united against drug costs
Americans prioritize medication prices
New drug-spending leader: Diabetes
Costs put cancer docs in financial bind
Comments
By Anonymous | Posted 10:25pm | August 26, 2009
The only way drug companies continue to increase profits is be cause they keep on coming up with new patentable products that gives them a monopoly over a product for a reasonable length of time. If the product is superior to earlier products by reason of less side effects (less nausea, less drowsiness, no neurological side effects (siezures), shorter period before patient gets condition under control (feels better and saves money), it is reasonable for the doctor to try the new product because only the doctor knows the patient and they tend to be conservative before jumping to a new product. If the new product sounds better by reason of data provided to FDA it is reasonable for the doctor to try it.
There is a tendancy fora man of science to be curious and assume the NEW product is better than the old one, therefore, a trial is worth considering if the patient does not respond to the original medication as desired. Often patients do well on a product but after a long time or less than that , they become drug fast. Meaning they require ever increasing doses to maintain the original result.
These are all reasonable reasons for a trial on the newer product if the doctor keeps in mind that NEWER DOES NOT MEAN BETTER. Watch the patient closely and go back to the older product if practicable. Price has to be a consideration in the overall sceme of things, however, patients are seeking relief or a cure for their problem. That is why the seek a doctor.
Post new comment
Paid Research Reports
- The Specialty Pharma Market Outlook: Key players, new company growth models and emerging opportunities
- Investigating Clinical Trial Costs: Comparative analysis of trial cost components in key geographies
- Clinical Trial Recruitment Strategies: Optimizing patient recruitment and retention in late stage clinical trials
- Pipeline Insight: Therapeutic Cancer Vaccines - Prospect of first approval set to reinvigorate interest from major companies
- Stakeholder Opinions: Vaccines in Emerging Markets (Asia) - Opportunities in China, India, South Korea and Taiwan
- Big Pharma Performance Before, During and Beyond the Global Recession
SHARE
WITH: