Hedge Fund Manager raises price of HIV drug 5000%

[....lybob]

That is idiocy of the highest order.

 

Supply and demand does not disappear because the whim of government or anyone else tries to control the supply....or the demand. And I don't find sick people funny, nor do I find the profit motive funny, nor do I find hardship funny. I find willful ignorance of universal truths funny....well comical anyway. That is why I laughed at your post.

What supply and demand? India is selling these pills at 5-10 cents - why can't US patients import them ? stick to eating crayons you mewing simpleton

[4merper4mer]

if i didn't think it was above you (and terribly boring) i'd suggest a discussion of the economic definition of commodity. as it is, the cliff notes and excerpts will have to do: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodity

 

The term commodity is specifically used for an economic good or service when the demand for it has no qualitative differentiation across a market.^[3] In other words, a commodity good or service has full or partial but substantial fungibility; that is, the market treats its instances as equivalent or nearly so with no regard to who produced them. As the saying goes, "From the taste of wheat, it is not possible to tell who produced it, a Russian serf, a French peasant or an Englishcapitalist."^[4]Petroleum and copper are other examples of such commodities,^[5] their supply and demand being a part of one universal market. Items such as stereo systems, on the other hand, have many aspects of product differentiation, such as the brand, the user interface and the perceived quality. The demand for one type of stereo may be much larger than demand for another.

In contrast, one of the characteristics of a commodity good is that its price is determined as a function of its market as a whole.

 

clearly in a gov't run system, the market doesn't determine price at all. there isn't a market. the price is fixed as is the supply.

 

as far as the first condition, it's not met by the current health care system since sit is not fungible but i think most refer to it in a figurative rather than literal sense as a commodity meaning it's bought and sold in much the same way as wheat or ore.

j

 

Health care a a whole is a commodity in the sense that getting healthy or living longer is the desired result. Does it matter if one drug cured you or another?

 

You are more apt to prefer McDonalds to BK than you are to have a preference for two medicines producing the same cure. The demand does not change like it might in the automobile market either. Survival does not care too much about leather seats or color. The supply is often full of substitutes but not always. The demand is pretty darn similar across all demographics.

 

Put the government in control of the supply and innovation is dead. Period. And you can spin around a thousand times and point to studies of this and that but it is dead. Put the government in control of demand and then you have real problems.

Edited September 23, 2015 by 4merper4mer

[4merper4mer]

What supply and demand? India is selling these pills at 5-10 cents - why can't US patients import them ? stick to eating crayons you mewing simpleton

I didn't read the article. Why? Beacause I've read 1000 just like it from people attempting to vilify one person or the other. They are always full of half truths and inaccuracies designed to show that the benevolent geniuses should be put in charge so that everyone can have everything for nothing. I'm done reading this kind of crap.

 

The effort put into writing and even reading them is wasted because the underlying realities of the world and human nature are ignored on the paper the articles occupy. These realities always win out in the real world even if we'd all prefer they didn't.

[Chef Jim]

What supply and demand? India is selling these pills at 5-10 cents - why can't US patients import them ? stick to eating crayons you mewing simpleton

I wouldn't put a samosa in my mouth made in India let alone a pharmaceutical

[birdog1960]

I didn't read the article. Why? Beacause I've read 1000 just like it from people attempting to vilify one person or the other. They are always full of half truths and inaccuracies designed to show that the benevolent geniuses should be put in charge so that everyone can have everything for nothing. I'm done reading this kind of crap.

 

The effort put into writing and even reading them is wasted because the underlying realities of the world and human nature are ignored on the paper the articles occupy. These realities always win out in the real world even if we'd all prefer they didn't.

it says nothing of the sort. it says one supremely selfish jerk is capitalizing on the suffering of others. is he unique? unfortunately, no. but letting him appear to win sends the wrong message to society. money is no good if you are unhappy. he will be unhappy and that should be publicized. and rules should be changed.. accepting that human nature is evil is a pretty miserable prospect as well. I don't accept it any more than I accept that perfection can be achieved in anything. it can't. but things can usually be improved.

[Chef Jim]

it says nothing of the sort. it says one supremely selfish jerk is capitalizing on the suffering of others. is he unique? unfortunately, no. but letting him appear to win sends the wrong message to society. money is no good if you are unhappy. he will be unhappy and that should be publicized. and rules should be changed.. accepting that human nature is evil is a pretty miserable prospect as well. I don't accept it any more than I accept that perfection can be achieved in anything. it can't. but things can usually be improved.

Who is letting him appear to win??

[birdog1960]

_{http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/23/business/big-price-increase-for-an-old-drug-will-be-rolled-back-turing-chief-says.html?_r=0}. this guy is such a peach! can't feel sorry for lehman who he also screwed but sheesh, what a butthole. the natural result of a system that values financial success over anything else, however.

Who is letting him appear to win??

a system that by design, financially favors individuals like him over the collective good.

 

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/09/23/martin-shkreli-lowers-drug-price-is-still-an-!@#$.html. nice piece that includes some perspective from infectious disease experts.

Edited September 23, 2015 by birdog1960

[Azalin]

Turing CEO to lower the cost of Daraprim:

 

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/company-lower-drug-price-critics-called-4000-hike/story?id=33955820

[birdog1960]

Turing CEO to lower the cost of Daraprim:

 

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/company-lower-drug-price-critics-called-4000-hike/story?id=33955820

yes, but he didn't say how much and this move completely undermines his argument defending the original price as explained int he above links. subhuman pos is a psychopath.

Edited September 23, 2015 by birdog1960

[TakeYouToTasker]

yes, but he didn't say how much and this move completely undermines his argument defending the original price as explained int he above links. subhuman pos is a psychopath.

Says the "winner" who strongly advocates destroying an entire populations access to healthcare as a means to a political end.

[Chef Jim]

_{http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/23/business/big-price-increase-for-an-old-drug-will-be-rolled-back-turing-chief-says.html?_r=0}. this guy is such a peach! can't feel sorry for lehman who he also screwed but sheesh, what a butthole. the natural result of a system that values financial success over anything else, however.

a system that by design, financially favors individuals like him over the collective good.

 

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/09/23/martin-shkreli-lowers-drug-price-is-still-an-!@#$.html. nice piece that includes some perspective from infectious disease experts.

 

So a system the rewards investment, innovation, growth and success does not benefit the collective good? Take a look around you. This system you so despise affords people in this country that are considered "poor" to have many of the luxuries of life that the actual poor in the rest of the world only dream about.

[4merper4mer]

it says nothing of the sort. it says one supremely selfish jerk is capitalizing on the suffering of others.....this is the vilification I knew was there without even reading it. is he unique? unfortunately, no. but letting him appear to win sends the wrong message to society. money is no good if you are unhappy. he will be unhappy and that should be publicized. and rules should be changed.........this is the part where I said they use this example to show the benevolent geniuses should be put in control because this guy is just one of many evil people. accepting that human nature is evil is a pretty miserable prospect as well. I don't accept it any more than I accept that perfection can be achieved in anything. it can't. but things can usually be improved.......this is the part where you call human nature "evil" with an almost comical naïveté which can never be satisfied. Human nature is not benevolent or evil...it is human nature. Were the humans of the 4th century evil because they hadn't yet found the cure for the bubonic plague? I mean their children's children's children would soon be dying in droves. Shouldn't these evil people have set aside their 100 smartest minds to cure this even though they didn't know about it?

 

People go where it benefits them to go. They always have and they always will. Calling this "evil" is a distorted view of reality.

This is your argument against what I said?

Edited September 23, 2015 by 4merper4mer

[DC Tom]

What supply and demand? India is selling these pills at 5-10 cents - why can't US patients import them ? stick to eating crayons you mewing simpleton

 

Birddog already explained that.

[birdog1960]

This is your argument against what I said?

huh? is this is a serious statement? bubonic plague?

 

the analogous situation would be having doxycycline to treat it cheaply available and then increasing the price 5000%. or even more timely, raising the price of cipro in an anthrax terrorist attack. if we can't agree that the person/corporation that would do that is deserving of severe scorn then we can't agree on anything.

 

oh, and btw, the price of doxycycline has recently increased a great deal through a similar mechanism as this toxo drug.

Edited September 23, 2015 by birdog1960

[Azalin]

yes, but he didn't say how much and this move completely undermines his argument defending the original price as explained int he above links. subhuman pos is a psychopath.

 

Give it a rest, for crying out loud. The guy got creamed in the media for raising the price so high, and now he's responding by lowering the price. He may well be a POS as a person, but what he's doing, while I think it's immoral, isn't illegal. Why not wait and see what they set as a price before dismissing the price reduction?

[4merper4mer]

huh? is this is a serious statement? bubonic plague?

 

the analogous situation would be having doxycycline to treat it cheaply available and then increasing the price 5000%. or even more timely, raising the price of cipro in an anthrax terrorist attack. if we can't agree that the person/corporation that would do that is deserving of severe scorn then we can't agree on anything.

 

oh, and btw, the price of doxycycline has recently increased a great deal through a similar mechanism as this toxo drug.

 

 

The red and blue parts were the crux of the discussion.

 

The orange was in response to your assumption that I was resigned to human nature being evil. This was a total mischaracterization of what I said and what I think. I used the 4th century plague cure example precisely because it was ridiculous. It was not quite as off base as your grasp on reality, but it was still way out there. I couldn't think of something that equaled the wackiness of your thought process.

[boyst]

jared has aids.

[OCinBuffalo]

this is exactly why healthcare shouldn't be a commodity.

 

It won't be, if we continue on our current path, and are left unhindered by the government, or worse, dumbass Ph.D. RNs and "health care workflow experts" who know less than nothing == they know things that aren't true. My newest favorite idiotic statement from heatlh care "expert": "workflow only works in health care if you limit its scope". I explain why that is galactically stupid below.

 

IF we proceed: It will literally be fee for specific, granular service and granular material consumption. It will be literally: variable cost(time + materials) + admin overhead + profit = fee, and everyone will be able to see both the components and the result of that equation in real time.

 

Once we've saturated the maket with the expectation of seeing that equation in detail, every time, all the time? What happens to hedgefund boy's plans? He doesn't even dare. Q.E.D. Problem solved.

 

 

 

 

--------

 

If you want to know how, read on.

 

 

The important thing to understand: variable MEANS variable. If Mrs. Jones schits herself while Suzy the LPN is taking vitals? That's more variable cost, and therefore, higher fee. But....NOT fee for the vitals! (which is how healthcare routiunely Fs this up). The cost of the TASK of taking the vitals must be separate and distinct from the cost of check/changing Mrs. Jones. They are 2 different tasks, and therefore should be costed-->"fee'd" separately.

 

Healthcare keeps trying to do this in terms of standardized, end to end processes(various idiotic constructs like: protocols, interventions, care plans, etc.). But there is no such thing as a standard, end to end process in an enviroment where 60% of the work, at minimum, is UNPLANNED. (Once TTYT reads this, he will instantly understand) In the above: checking is planned work. Changing is unplanned, because you only do it if you find the poo poo. Thus, MOST health care work cannot be planned ahead, despite how many dopey instruments, generated by government grants, are created. We can try to predict the poo. But what is the point? You still have to clean it up, and that costs what it costs. Now do you see why "limiting workflow's scope" is galactically idiotic? How do I even know I have unplanned work to do, if I don't communicate that fact to the enterpise, and then assign and account for it, until completed?

 

Thus, our focus MUST be on granular(lowest reasonable leve) task and material consumption, and not on pretending hospitals/LTC/offices == factory production lines, or on the next set of retarded paper pretending to be electronic-based buffoonery.

 

Until health care people get that fact through their thick heads, and realize that it is on THEM, and nobody else, to record exactly what they do, each time, because it IS different, both qaulitatively and quantitively, and therefore costs different? Commoditization will always be a "solution" that is advanced by both the LEFT AND THE RIGHT. Different reasons: same solution.

 

Look: the pressure from the non-health care people to commoditize health care will ALWAYS be there.

 

THE ONLY way health care defends itself from being commiditized is proving that each patient's care IS highly specialized and specific. You do that by proving that what you do for one patient IS NOT the same as what you do for the next.

 

Thus, the very next time you hear any RN/LPN/MD say "We are patient-centered" or "I know all my patients" or "We give great care to every patient here" or "We do the same thing every time" or "Medicine/Nursing is medicine/nursing, we all learned and do the same thing" B word slap them. None of that is true.

Edited September 25, 2015 by OCinBuffalo

[birdog1960]

It won't be, if we continue on our current path, and are left unhindered by the government, or worse, dumbass Ph.D. RNs and "health care workflow experts" who know less than nothing == they know things that aren't true. My newest favorite idiotic statement from heatlh care "expert": "workflow only works in health care if you limit its scope". I explain why that is galactically stupid below.

 

IF we proceed: It will literally be fee for specific, granular service and granular material consumption. It will be literally: variable cost(time + materials) + admin overhead + profit = fee, and everyone will be able to see both the components and the result of that equation in real time.

 

Once we've saturated the maket with the expectation of seeing that equation in detail, every time, all the time? What happens to hedgefund boy's plans? He doesn't even dare. Q.E.D. Problem solved.

 

 

 

 

--------

 

If you want to know how, read on.

 

 

The important thing to understand: variable MEANS variable. If Mrs. Jones schits herself while Suzy the LPN is taking vitals? That's more variable cost, and therefore, higher fee. But....NOT fee for the vitals! (which is how healthcare routiunely Fs this up). The cost of the TASK of taking the vitals must be separate and distinct from the cost of check/changing Mrs. Jones. They are 2 different tasks, and therefore should be costed-->"fee'd" separately.

 

Healthcare keeps trying to do this in terms of standardized, end to end processes(various idiotic constructs like: protocols, interventions, care plans, etc.). But there is no such thing as a standard, end to end process in an enviroment where 60% of the work, at minimum, is UNPLANNED. (Once TTYT reads this, he will instantly understand) In the above: checking is planned work. Changing is unplanned, because you only do it if you find the poo poo. Thus, MOST health care work cannot be planned ahead, despite how many dopey instruments, generated by government grants, are created. We can try to predict the poo. But what is the point? You still have to clean it up, and that costs what it costs. Now do you see why "limiting workflow's scope" is galactically idiotic? How do I even know I have unplanned work to do, if I don't communicate that fact to the enterpise, and then assign and account for it, until completed?

 

Thus, our focus MUST be on granular(lowest reasonable leve) task and material consumption, and not on pretending hospitals/LTC/offices == factory production lines, or on the next set of retarded paper pretending to be electronic-based buffoonery.

 

Until health care people get that fact through their thick heads, and realize that it is on THEM, and nobody else, to record exactly what they do, each time, because it IS different, both qaulitatively and quantitively, and therefore costs different? Commoditization will always be a "solution" that is advanced by both the LEFT AND THE RIGHT. Different reasons: same solution.

 

Look: the pressure from the non-health care people to commoditize health care will ALWAYS be there.

 

THE ONLY way health care defends itself from being commiditized is proving that each patient's care IS highly specialized and specific. You do that by proving that what you do for one patient IS NOT the same as what you do for the next.

 

Thus, the very next time you hear any RN/LPN/MD say "We are patient-centered" or "I know all my patients" or "We give great care to every patient here" or "We do the same thing every time" or "Medicine/Nursing is medicine/nursing, we all learned and do the same thing" B word slap them. None of that is true.

you are missing the most important point: someone is cleaning these poor patients up. someone is caring. that someone is usually a low paid aid but it can be a nurse or even a doctor. would they do it for free? for most, no, but they could choose another job. most have chosen health care because they want to help and they care.

 

that can't be monetized. it's invaluable.

 

this piece of excrement is the polar opposite. he has contempt for the sick. there should be no place for him or anyone like him in the field.

[4merper4mer]

you are missing the most important point: someone is cleaning these poor patients up. someone is caring. that someone is usually a low paid aid but it can be a nurse or even a doctor. would they do it for free? for most, no, but they could choose another job. most have chosen health care because they want to help and they care.

 

that can't be monetized. it's invaluable.

 

this piece of excrement is the polar opposite. he has contempt for the sick. there should be no place for him or anyone like him in the field.

Maybe we should appoint a federal government czar to stand at the top of the capital building and pass judgement on every person involved with health care. He could make a list, he should check it twice so he doesn't get sued for slander, and he can tell everyone who is naughty and who is nice. Then we could have a unicorn fart rainbows in the direction of the nice people. I don't know what to do about the meanies. I'd say give them a lump of coal in their sock but they would probably burn it to keep warm and excalibrate the global warming issue.