Comments on: cheap meds – gma vs. mar

By: Orlando R

Orlando R — Sat, 18 Jul 2009 14:23:35 +0000

Hoo-hah! as Al Pacino would say.. Cheers.

By: angela

angela — Sat, 18 Jul 2009 10:36:51 +0000

but isn't it that the rationale for CSR is the reality that returns on capital investment is so outrageously ~~large~~ scandalously unfairly huge nga, so talaga naman, they have to find ways ~~have to be found~~ to give back to society, or they might not go to heaven. ;)

By: Orlando R

Orlando R — Sat, 18 Jul 2009 10:08:19 +0000

In a nutshell, it is a question of good or bad faith. If CSR is just “cover” for a cartel or an illegal monopoly, then it is a hoax against the consumer. But it can also be a hoax against the stockholders. The duty of a corporation is to earn a return on the capital invested, and not to engage in “public relations” for the corporate officers and principals.

By: angela

angela — Sat, 18 Jul 2009 09:47:37 +0000

hmm CSR a hoax? pls explain ;)

By: Orlando R

Orlando R — Sat, 18 Jul 2009 09:43:14 +0000

But it’s a gamble. For every Lipitor, there are so many others that didn’t work out. This means there are other manufacturers who didn’t do well at all. It’s a tough choice: Do you want the small chance that there could be a wonder drug that makes tons of money to the lucky inventor, and saves your life? Or do you want to have no wonder drugs because you don’t want a few to make big bucks. I sometimes think Filipinos prefer the latter. It’s like a home-grown schadenfreude. But I hope I’m wrong. Btw, you hit on CSR as a gimmick. Personally, I suspect it’s a hoax.

By: angela

angela — Sat, 18 Jul 2009 07:52:10 +0000

panalong panalo na sila sa pagsugal sa wonder drugs na yan. ang tagal na nilang tumatabo. puwede namang bawasan ang patong nila na napakalaki. moderate the greed. kahit bawasan ng 50% ang patong dito sa atin, winner pa rin sila. dapat ito na mismo ang CSR gimik nila, para tumbok talaga ang pangangailangan ng taongbayan.

By: Orlando R

Orlando R — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 08:32:04 +0000

To Angela: Is it good business to “cause” a shortage? Maybe not. But so long as we rely on a market but want to regulate it, we can control either the price or the quantity to be sold but not both. If we controlled both, that would be confiscation.

By: Orlando R

Orlando R — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 08:27:12 +0000

To Angela: Rice and generics are reasonably comparable, and the fact of lines and shortages will likely still be there even if the good is one subject to a (legal) monopoly. As to medicines still under patent, we do have a duty to respect intellectual property laws, though there are ways to “bend” them a little in favor of poor countries (witness how India does it). It is a matter of negotiation to some extent. Furthermore, many of the life-saving drugs are already off-patent and can be had as generics. But fundamentally, we have wonder drugs because someone took time and effort to gamble in the inventing process, and the patent laws grant a temporary monopoly to ensure that such innovation take place.

By: angela

angela — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 07:59:21 +0000

@ jun ;) tama ka, ang problema dito sa atin (dito lang sa atin, take note) ay walang competition ang higanteng multinational drug co.s. bakit kaya. bakit kahit kelan kahit aling administrasyon mula independence ay walang pondo parati for the research and development needed for us to have our own drug industry, lalo na’t mayaman tayo sa mga halamang gamot na mabisa. bakit bakit bakit? kasi malamang me lagayan blues hanggang sa kaitaastaasan.

By: angela

angela — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 07:51:57 +0000

@ orlando ;) umm comparable ba talaga ang rice situation sa meds situation? ang rice limited talaga ang supply dahil affected by variable climate etc. pero ang meds, would pfizer actually manufacture less meds or make available less meds so that we will suffer a lack of supply? bad business yon di ba. would they really go so far?

By: jun

jun — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 07:41:56 +0000

@Orlando, I agree. Hindi ako pabor sa government mandated price ceiling. Let the market dictate the price. Kaso naman, wala ngang kalaban ang mga higante sa industriya, kaya nakakadikta sila ng presyo nila.

Importante sa palagay ko ang pagpapalaganap ng kaalaman tungkol sa generics, dahil mahalaga ang magiging papel nito upang bumaba ang presyo ng mga branded na gamot. At kung maari, hindi ako aware kung merong batas na ganito, ay gawing compulsary ang paglalagay ng generic name ng mga gamot sa mga resetang ibinibigay ng mga doktor at ang kaungkupang paliwanag tungkol sa generics upang magkaroon ng idea ang mga pasyente o mamimili na meron silang choice.

By: Orlando R

Orlando R — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 18:45:52 +0000

Hi Angela,
When you have a price ceiling, and the seller can choose the quantity he sells at that price, you can have a classic shortage. People will have to line up to buy, which you see in the case of NFA rice. Of course, the poor will likely prefer to line up than to pay the high price, and the rich will pay the poor to line up for them. But some — both rich and poor — will do without, not because the price is high, but because there is no more to be had. Perhaps a significant part of the problem can be solved if the generics market were more developed. In other words, you can solve the “high price” problem somewhat by bringing in more competition.