WASHINGTON — Democratic lawmakers in recent weeks have begun to advance an argument long seen as something of a third rail in U.S. politics: that slightly less biomedical innovation might be worth a dramatic reduction in drug prices.

The surprising candor has come amid pushback to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s high-profile drug pricing bill, which the trade group PhRMA this month said represented “nuclear winter” for the development of new medicines. Some Democrats, in response, have attempted to reframe the discussion in purely utilitarian terms, asserting that dramatically lower costs now justify a marginal reduction in new treatments in the coming decades.

Unlock this article by subscribing to STAT Plus and enjoy your first 30 days free!

GET STARTED

What is it?

STAT Plus is STAT's premium subscription service for in-depth biotech, pharma, policy, and life science coverage and analysis. Our award-winning team covers news on Wall Street, policy developments in Washington, early science breakthroughs and clinical trial results, and health care disruption in Silicon Valley and beyond.

What's included?

  • Daily reporting and analysis
  • The most comprehensive industry coverage from a powerhouse team of reporters
  • Subscriber-only newsletters
  • Daily newsletters to brief you on the most important industry news of the day
  • Online intelligence briefings
  • Frequent opportunities to engage with veteran beat reporters and industry experts
  • Exclusive industry events
  • Premium access to subscriber-only networking events around the country
  • The best reporters in the industry
  • The most trusted and well-connected newsroom in the health care industry
  • And much more
  • Exclusive interviews with industry leaders, profiles, and premium tools, like our CRISPR Trackr.

Leave a Comment

Please enter your name.
Please enter a comment.

  • Are patients in all the other countries that pay half or less of what American patients pay for drugs saying “Thank goodness U.S. patients are the suckers who pay for all the innovation from which we all benefit?” This has got to be seen internationally as drug development is a very global business. I lean in the direction that controls on prices will force drug companies to spend less money on me-too drugs with marginal improvements and more on meaningful innovation that would not be as affected by price controls. Most of them rely on expensive acquisitions for new drugs anyway, v.s. being more efficient at developing them themselves. They could also reduce the tons they spend on marketing – just watch 10 minutes of CNN any time of day… and on grossly inflated executive salaries. Also, more than anything else, we need the FDA to start considering not only safety and efficacy but also value, like NICE does in the U.K. and many other countries. We spend 50% more on healthcare and have worse outcomes by most measures than most other OECD countries. Why?