They don't even need that research and development excuse now, I see hedge funds are buying pharmaceutical companies and jacking up the prices and saying take it or leave it ..

(Thu-24-03-2016, 10:12 AM)jiml Wrote: They don't even need that research and development  excuse now, I see hedge funds are buying pharmaceutical companies and jacking up the prices and saying take it or leave it ..

Yes, it is time the government takes back its patents, as lots of this research has been funded by government so is our property.

(Thu-24-03-2016, 10:19 AM)Caroline Wrote:

(Thu-24-03-2016, 10:12 AM)jiml Wrote: They don't even need that research and development  excuse now, I see hedge funds are buying pharmaceutical companies and jacking up the prices and saying take it or leave it ..

Yes, it is time the government takes back its patents, as lots of this research has been funded by government so is our property.

In other words, let's kill the hedge funds. They only steal money of the big pile and relocate it to people who already have so much money that they cannot spend it before their death. And... That are only a handful of people, so it hurts hardly anybody taking away some of them which they didn't earn decently anyway.

(Thu-24-03-2016, 10:19 AM)Caroline Wrote:

(Thu-24-03-2016, 10:12 AM)jiml Wrote: They don't even need that research and development  excuse now, I see hedge funds are buying pharmaceutical companies and jacking up the prices and saying take it or leave it ..

Yes, it is time the government takes back its patents, as lots of this research has been funded by government so is our property.

agreed with both posts

I would think it much harder to measure the degree of pain reduction, and if the assessors are calling 2% "clear", well they should just go back to their old jobs flogging face bog at the beauty counter. "Yes luv, this will get rid of all your wrinkles and make you look ten years younger. Just look at these amazing before and after photos."

(Thu-24-03-2016, 10:38 AM)Bill Wrote: I would think it much harder to measure the degree of pain reduction, and if the assessors are calling 2% "clear", well they should just go back to their old jobs flogging face bog at the beauty counter. "Yes luv, this will get rid of all your wrinkles and make you look ten years younger. Just look at these amazing before and after photos."

Me thinks you are being a tad cynical Bill    ...I agree it's not factual to call 2% clear but I find it difficult to put a percentage on the two tiny spots I have hence I put in my profile " almost clear"  I regard myself clear enough to socialise anywhere, beaches,swimming pools, clear enough to wear shorts and t shirts without fearing looking like a leper...
I think we can strive for clearance, but until they find a "cure" we will probably always have a small amount, which I regard as clear

Jim rushes off to work, where at the cosmetic counter they are waiting to be told that the miracle skin cream makes them look really attractive  

Jim, I agree with being glass half full people, but if you are assessing the efficacy of drugs you cannot behave like a wrinkle cream spruiker. Dont think that a company would not fudge data to get its product to market and make it out to be better than the competition.

(Thu-24-03-2016, 11:07 AM)Bill Wrote: Jim, I agree with being glass half full people, but if you are assessing the efficacy of drugs you cannot behave like a wrinkle cream spruiker. Dont think that a company would not fudge data to get its product to market and make it out to be better than the competition.

That had me looking in my English Australian dictionary ( spruiker) good word
Although I think we are straying again off the topic

You might even look up skark, Jim. That is a Tasmanian word. They are far more uncouth there, if that is possible. It sounds to me like the company execs were perhaps a bit obtuse.

(Thu-24-03-2016, 11:07 AM)Bill Wrote: Jim, I agree with being glass half full people, but if you are assessing the efficacy of drugs you cannot behave like a wrinkle cream spruiker. Dont think that a company would not fudge data to get its product to market and make it out to be better than the competition.

They already do this by running multiple phase 2 and 3 trials to get the results they want. The go to drug for psoriasis is Stelara - that is why drug manufacturers are testing their products against Stelara. We have reasonable amount evidence that consentyx helps PsA and AS. Is the results as good as TNFs? Who cares. Consentyx is a new product and at least for PsA is never going to be first in line treatment. This is about giving people opinions for this disease when they fail others such as TNFs.

This drug is expensive, and I don't blame anyone for not wanting to pay the high price. However, we can stop all the political nonsense and excuses. Their punch line should be "The price to performance ratio isn't as good as some of current medication. Therefore we will approve the request."