Medical Fees
-
As usual, you sidetrack the issue to non relevant arguments.Originally posted by oxford mushroom:Talking big when you don't know half the story. The cost of medicine is high because pharmaceutical companies have to recopu the cost of their investment in making and marketing the drug. It is a high-risk business. The research and development costs are high and the number of failed products during development is high.
Recently, Pfizer's most promising new drug torcetrapib failed at an advanced stage in the trials and the company lost USD$1 billion. This has sparked off worldwide job cuts of 10,000 jobs. (http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/04/health/04pfizer.html?ex=1170565200&en=689c2dea8785f884&ei=5070)
Brainless ranting again....
You obviously don't understand what the threadstarter is saying.
Please go to school and get a proper education.
Remember to fleet your mouth once in the morning and another before going to bed. -
Did some search on the net, found out the cost of Rosiglitazone (Avandia) 4mg only cost USD 96.62 for 100 tablets in the USA. Which cost around SGD 1.48 per tablet in Singapore dollars.Originally posted by Lowclassman:Happened to this guy, Tas
Recently, I am treated in Changi GH for diabetic. This is my second visit at Changi GH after more than 5 years of treatment by GP. The total cost was $331.95, of which I co-pay for $78.09 in cash; balance of $253.86 is from my Mediasave. Just one visit, my $300 limit per year was wiped off by 85%.
Why was it so expensive?
The cost of medicine, Roisglitazone 4mg ( avandia) per tablets for 70 tablets was already $218.40 or $3.12 per tab.
The same tablet produced by the same manufacturer and in genuine packaging is easily available without prescription in Thailand for less than $0.80 per tablet.
The licensed manufacturer in India retails at $0.24 per tablet. Note this is not “copy” tablet, which is sold at less than this amount.
To reduce patient cost, I suggest the Health Ministry (HM) allows patient to buy oneÂ’s drug and be held responsible for oneÂ’s consequences.
Why genuine drug in Thailand is so much cheaper than those “dispensed” by the HM clinics? Are the traders making a large profit at the expense of patient? Should HM parallel import to give a run on those drug traders? Government is talking about free market and globalisation. Should such practice be available patients, the ultimate consumers? Patients and Govt are too worry of high medical cost … this is one good example in which cost can be reduced substantially.
Perhaps, patients should organise group purchase to demonstrate consumersÂ’ power.
Think we have been suckered.
I think the government's idea of subsidized medical cost is different from everybody. They add other non-relevant cost to it, if cost of drug is $1.48, they add other non-relevant cost to $4.50 (which is 3 times the original cost), then give you a subsidy of $1.38 and claim to have subsidize your medical cost by 30.7%.
A study by Migrant Clinician (An Organisation in the USA) on the cost of Diabetic Medication in the USA and Mexico. [Adobe Acrobat File] -
Trying to hoodwink others by compairing cheap generics against the originals sold by GSK?Originally posted by maurizio13:Did some search on the net, found out the cost of Rosiglitazone (Avandia) 4mg only cost USD 96.62 for 100 tablets in the USA. Which cost around SGD 1.48 per tablet in Singapore dollars.
Think we have been suckered.
I think the government's idea of subsidized medical cost is different from everybody. They add other non-relevant cost to it, if cost of drug is $1.48, they add other non-relevant cost to $4.50 (which is 3 times the original cost), then give you a subsidy of $1.38 and claim to have subsidize your medical cost by 30.7%.
A study by Migrant Clinician (An Organisation in the USA) on the cost of Diabetic Medication in the USA and Mexico. [Adobe Acrobat File]
-
In July 2004, 12 drug manufacturers in China successfully challenged Pfizer's Viagra patent, in effect gaining the ability to make sildenafil citrate-containing drugs with impunity. A month later, GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) bowed out from a dispute over the diabetes drug rosiglitazone (Avandia) after four Chinese manufacturers filed requests to invalidate their formulation patent. The manufacturers can now legally produce a version of the drug, although GSK retains the exclusive right to manufacture Avandia itself, as it holds patents on the manufacturing process and compound. "We saw the case was not that robust and decided it was sensible to withdraw," says GSK spokesman Chris Hunter-Ward.
Experts are following the two cases closely for indications of what this means for China's legal system, and its ability to protect patents. Pfizer launched an appeal in September 2004 with Bei-jing's First Intermediate People's Court. In March, a Chinese court adjourned a hearing on Pfizer's appeal and said a verdict will be delivered at a later date.
At the time of the decision, Pfizer's chairman and chief executive, Henry McKinnell, said the company was "extremely disappointed" and that the decision could discourage Pfizer from making further investments in China. Deputy US Trade Representative Josette Shiner described the challenge to Pfizer's patent as "particularly troubling" and the American Chamber of Commerce in China questioned China's commitment to respecting the intellectual property (IP) rights of foreign companies.
However, if Pfizer ultimately loses the case, it is unlikely to deter other drug manufacturers from the Chinese market, according to Alan Adcock, senior associate with IP consultants Rouse & Co. International. "The market's too attractive," he says.
What it could do is push pharmaceutical companies to take patent protection in China more seriously, says Toby Mak, patent executive at international law firm Deacons in Hong Kong. "Chinese manufacturers are small, but if they can come together they have sufficient resources to play the patent game."
Arguably, grappling with patent infringement goes with the territory of staking an early claim to China's huge and growing pharmaceuticals market. Western medicine accounts for 67% of the total market, of which over 70% is in the form of generic drugs, according to China's State Food and Drug Administration. Last year, China's pharmaceuticals market was the fastest growing in the world, with sales up 28% to $9.5 billion (US), according to international pharmaceutical and healthcare consultants IMS. By 2010, it is expected to be worth $24 billion. That number is peanuts compared to the $466 billion market in the US, but still the fifth largest in the world after the United States, Japan, Germany, and France.
http://www.the-scientist.com/article/display/15489/
Cheap generics of this drug from China are available. You are free to buy in China if you want to, but the Health Ministry is bound by legal obligations. -
You don't read too well, do you?Originally posted by oxford mushroom:Trying to hoodwink others by compairing cheap generics against the originals sold by GSK?
Lowclassman was comparing his drug Rosiglitazone (4mg) from Avandia to alternative sources, while I posted an USA organisation which did a survey on the cost of the drug Rosiglitazone (4mg) from Avandia in USA and Mexico.
You wanted to compare a similar drug from GSK. Tell me you don't have any psychological problems. Your response was totally irrelevant to the discussion.
Hey! Isn't Avandia under GSK!
Man!! You are screwed!! -
Originally posted by oxford mushroom:
Your cut and paste is totally irrelevant.
In July 2004, 12 drug manufacturers in China successfully challenged Pfizer's Viagra patent, in effect gaining the ability to make sildenafil citrate-containing drugs with impunity. A month later, GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) bowed out from a dispute over the diabetes drug [b]rosiglitazone (Avandia) after four Chinese manufacturers filed requests to invalidate their formulation patent. The manufacturers can now legally produce a version of the drug, although GSK retains the exclusive right to manufacture Avandia itself, as it holds patents on the manufacturing process and compound. "We saw the case was not that robust and decided it was sensible to withdraw," says GSK spokesman Chris Hunter-Ward.
Experts are following the two cases closely for indications of what this means for China's legal system, and its ability to protect patents. Pfizer launched an appeal in September 2004 with Bei-jing's First Intermediate People's Court. In March, a Chinese court adjourned a hearing on Pfizer's appeal and said a verdict will be delivered at a later date.
At the time of the decision, Pfizer's chairman and chief executive, Henry McKinnell, said the company was "extremely disappointed" and that the decision could discourage Pfizer from making further investments in China. Deputy US Trade Representative Josette Shiner described the challenge to Pfizer's patent as "particularly troubling" and the American Chamber of Commerce in China questioned China's commitment to respecting the intellectual property (IP) rights of foreign companies.
However, if Pfizer ultimately loses the case, it is unlikely to deter other drug manufacturers from the Chinese market, according to Alan Adcock, senior associate with IP consultants Rouse & Co. International. "The market's too attractive," he says.
What it could do is push pharmaceutical companies to take patent protection in China more seriously, says Toby Mak, patent executive at international law firm Deacons in Hong Kong. "Chinese manufacturers are small, but if they can come together they have sufficient resources to play the patent game."
Arguably, grappling with patent infringement goes with the territory of staking an early claim to China's huge and growing pharmaceuticals market. Western medicine accounts for 67% of the total market, of which over 70% is in the form of generic drugs, according to China's State Food and Drug Administration. Last year, China's pharmaceuticals market was the fastest growing in the world, with sales up 28% to $9.5 billion (US), according to international pharmaceutical and healthcare consultants IMS. By 2010, it is expected to be worth $24 billion. That number is peanuts compared to the $466 billion market in the US, but still the fifth largest in the world after the United States, Japan, Germany, and France.
http://www.the-scientist.com/article/display/15489/
Cheap generics of this drug from China are available. You are free to buy in China if you want to, but the Health Ministry is bound by legal obligations.[/b]
Must be the stress from managing toilets in UK. -
The toilets in UK so dirty meh??
-
Geylang toilets is very dirty lah,that why he has to take so long 2 think how to reply U!!!Originally posted by maurizio13:The toilets in UK so dirty meh??
-
Cannot believe there are so many anencephalic morons walking around!Originally posted by maurizio13:You don't read too well, do you?
Lowclassman was comparing his drug Rosiglitazone (4mg) from Avandia to alternative sources, while I posted an USA organisation which did a survey on the cost of the drug Rosiglitazone (4mg) from Avandia in USA and Mexico.
You wanted to compare a similar drug from GSK. Tell me you don't have any psychological problems. Your response was totally irrelevant to the discussion.
Hey! Isn't Avandia under GSK!
Man!! You are screwed!!
Avandia is the brand name of a drug whose chemical (generic) name is rosiglitazone maleate and is marketed by GSK. There are no legally available generics (cheaper versions of the drug) as yet because GSK still holds the patent. Recently, the Chinese have been making different versions of the drug (such as making a different salt of rosiglitazone), many of which may have been floated on the internet.
Is it surprising that Lowclassman should find that an illegal copy drug on the Internet should be cheaper than the original produced by GSK? -
Originally posted by oxford mushroom:
I think the consensus here is that your are a lobotomized cephalodymus with female pseudohermaphroditism.
Cannot believe there are so many anencephalic morons walking around!
Avandia is the [b]brand name of a drug whose chemical (generic) name is rosiglitazone maleate and is marketed by GSK. There are no legally available generics (cheaper versions of the drug) as yet because GSK still holds the patent. Recently, the Chinese have been making different versions of the drug (such as making a different salt of rosiglitazone), many of which may have been floated on the internet.
Is it surprising that Lowclassman should find that an illegal copy drug on the Internet should be cheaper than the original produced by GSK?
[/b]
If you are a doctor, get more malpractice insurance, you are tres cretin. -
I wonder if u study Pharmacology.Originally posted by maurizio13:I think the consensus here is that your are a lobotomized cephalodymus with female pseudohermaphroditism.
If you are a doctor, get more malpractice insurance, you are tres cretin.
If u really did, guess u really flung the subject big time.