The Pros And Cons Of Prescription Drugs

When it comes to the topic of prescription drugs being regulated, most of us will readily agree that this is a big concern for many Americans. Where this argument usually ends, however, is on the question of why do Americans pay some of the highest prices for prescription drugs compared to other countries. Whereas some are convinced that these high costs are set solely for the fact of the amount of money spent on producing these drugs, others maintain that there is an opportunity for medication prices to be regulated and also an opportunity to allow Medicare to negotiate with pharmaceuticals and possibly help bring down those high prices . I agree that prescription drugs should be regulated because there are many people that are victimized
Although this is true, there is more money going into advertising and marketing rather than Research and Development. As an example, in a graph done by Leon Markovits of Dadaviz, he found and graphed money being spent from healthcare research and found that one of the top spenders was the company Johnson & Johnson. They spent 17.5 billion on sales and marketing and only 8.2 billion for Research and Development (Swanson). Ana Swanson mentions in her article written in the Washington Post, “Most of this marketing money is directed at the physicians who do the prescribing, rather than consumers”. In other words, Swanson believes that this load of money being spent on marketing and advertising is mostly going to the physicians that sample out the products and give to patients for a trial. For these sales to occur pharmaceutical companies must also hire representatives to present their product to physicians. According to The PEW Charitable Trusts article, “As of 2012, approximately 72,000 pharmaceutical sales representatives were employed in the United States” (Persuading the Prescribers). The essence of the argument made in this article is that with hiring more representatives, more money is being spent on unnecessary
Medicare is a disputed topic for the reason of how it is not allowed to negotiate with pharmaceuticals by law. Studies show that if Medicare was allowed to negotiate with pharmaceuticals as an individual buyer, it would help drop prices for many patients and other insurers. Medicare pays more than other U.S agencies because they lack the power of negotiation, but with the power of negotiation, they would be able to demand much more discount because of the fact that they would be buying in bulk. This point is valid because of the groups like The Department of Veterans Affairs and outside countries who also buy in bulk and are able to negotiate for discounts for pharmaceuticals. Since drug companies are only looking to recover their money spent on Research and Development and making a reasonable profit off their medications, it would seem possible for Medicare to buy in bulk; receive a good discount and still let drug companies reimburse themselves and make a profit. Also, because the pharmaceutical industry sells their drugs for normally more than 200 percent higher than their cost of production, the growth rate of drug prices seems to only be getting higher despite the cost of production. If Medicare were able to negotiate with pharmaceuticals, it would be able to