Contribute Try STAT+ Today

One of the top orders of business for the Biden administration is curbing drug prices.

It’s a laudable goal. High drug prices are a major public health concern; there is broad political support for reining in the cost of drugs; and Americans pay a lot for drugs.

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


What is it?

STAT+ 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
  • STAT+ Conversations
  • Weekly opportunities to engage with our reporters and leading industry experts in live video conversations
  • 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.
  • Actually if one looks up the data not an opinion drug prices in the US are 3 to 5 x higher than all European countries and others ; in year 2018 the US spent 365 BILLION with a B which is half the defense budget ; to correct high pricing allow importation of drugs from any country but Congress will never allow this ; we all know WHY

  • Your central point, Jake, is that patents are not a panacea. True. But when you do see deliberate creation of impenetrable patent thickets and broad claims, patent practices and jurisprudence do matter. So finding common ground with Matt Lane’s parallel opinion piece, what are two or three reforms that *should* be pursued regarding patents to improve access to drugs, devices and medical services? Even if they don’t save the world, current practice matters immensely to some subpopulations, and patent reform might improve access. Even if improving access, would such reforms reduce incentives for finding new products and services in the first place?

  • Many valid points EXCEPT the patent system DOES need to be used properly vis a vis Bayh-Dole provision regarding the “claw back provision” that as one expert suggested has no claws. It is absolutely essential that *when necessary* it is used. An example of such a use should have been the case of Gilead’s Truvada, which has been used for PrEP (indication). The cost differential here between this brand name drug and its use even if branded in Europe and generics available elsewhere has had an impact on the spread of HIV/AIDS.

Comments are closed.