Filed under: General Problems | Leave a Comment »
Steve Ariens,P.D.
Chronic Pain Management Consultant
I asked this person the following question:
Filed under: General Problems | Leave a Comment »
Filed under: General Problems | 4 Comments »
There is also a old saying, with age, comes wisdom. – or is it common sense and many figure out that friendship is more important than some political beliefs?
Typically, good friends will have your back, politicians will lie to your face!
Filed under: General Problems | 3 Comments »
If you’ve been living under a rock for the past few years, take note that there are very effective medications used to treat obesity and type II diabetes. They include products with glucagon-like peptide (GLP-1) activity.
The two dominant players in the industry are Novo Nordisk and Lilly.
Novo Nordisk distributes semaglutide: Ozempic for Type 2 diabetes; and Wegovy, a higher-dose product, approved for weight loss.
Lilly distributes tirzepatide: Mounjaro for Type 2 diabetes; and Zepbound, a higher-dose product, approved for weight loss. Tirzepatide works by mimicking two gut hormones: GLP-1 and glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP).
Normally, when a drug is approved, the pharmaceutical sponsor has monopoly rights to distribute. The branded pharmaceuticals of Novo Nordisk and Lilly are not cheap. A one month supply is typically $1,000. Or more. And depending upon the patient’s insurance, it may not be covered.
Because of such high demand, patients HAVE been able to obtain what they want. Actually, it’s more accurate to say because of limited supply, patients HAVE been able to obtain what they want.
When drugs are in shortage, compounders are permitted to sell versions of those medications ostensibly to ensure patients can continue receiving care. By outsourcing to compounding pharmacies, companies and medical spas have been able to circumvent Eli Lilly and Novo Nordisk’s exclusive hold on GLP-1 drugs.
Many medications are currently on the FDA’s shortage list. As of October 2024, for example, clonazepam tablets and cis-platinum injections are in short supply. Most patients are not rushing to compounders to fill that need.
Presumably there’s a common manufacturing pathway for the compounded medications and branded medications.
Patients who have been accessing compounded GLP-1 drugs have been paying as low as $100/month.
This sets the stage for Novo Nordisk and Lilly to ramp up manufacturing capacity to serve anticipated demand.
On October 2, 2024, FDA sent out a press release.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has determined the shortage of tirzepatide injection, a glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) medication, has been resolved. Tirzepatide injection has been in shortage since 2022 due to increased demand.
FDA confirmed with the drug’s manufacturer that their stated product availability and manufacturing capacity can meet the present and projected national demand. Patients and prescribers may still see intermittent localized supply disruptions as the products move through the supply chain from the manufacturer and distributors to local pharmacies.
FDA reminds compounders of the legal restrictions on making copies of FDA-approved drugs
Compounded drugs are not approved by FDA. FDA-approved drugs go through FDA’s rigorous review for safety, effectiveness, and quality as part of the premarket approval process. Compounded drugs must meet conditions to qualify for exemptions under sections 503A and 503B of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic (FD&C) Act. Among the conditions are:
- Section 503A of the FD&C Act includes restrictions on compounding drugs that are essentially copies of a commercially available drug. When a drug shortage is resolved, FDA generally considers the drug to be commercially available. Certain amounts are permissible under the law as long as the compounding is not done “regularly or in inordinate amounts.”
- Section 503B of the FD&C Act restricts outsourcing facilities from making compounded drugs that are essentially a copy of one or more FDA-approved drugs. Among other things, this means the compounded drug may not be identical or nearly identical to an FDA-approved drug unless the approved drug is on FDA’s drug shortage list.
Current shortage status of GLP-1 products (as of October 02, 2024):
- Tirzepatide injection: Shortage resolved.
- Dulaglutide injection: In shortage.
- Semaglutide injection: In shortage. Manufacturer has reported all but one of the presentations are available.
- Liraglutide injection: In shortage. Manufacturer has reported 2 presentations are available, and three have limited availability.
The agency will continue to work with manufacturers to help resolve the current shortages, and, as shortages resolve, will closely monitor the situation and provide any assistance we can to help manufacturers ensure an adequate supply. Before determining that a shortage is resolved, FDA considers a variety of factors, including the company’s ability to meet current and historical demand, the amount in a manufacturer’s stock, affected market share, ability of alternate manufacturers to cover the demand, and confirmed market stabilization. Please visit FDA’s Drug Shortages Database for the most recent information on the status of GLP-1 medicines and other drugs in shortage.
On first blush, it appeared the “party was over” for those seeking inexpensive compounded tirzepatide.
Semaglutide was still in short supply, and available via compounders at low price. But even that could change quickly.
Then, a lawsuit was filed in Fort Worth, Texas federal court by the Outsourcing Facilities Association claiming the FDA failed to follow proper procedures in making the change.
The FDA did not give the public a chance to weigh in on its decision and trusted assurances from Lilly, “the company that is self-interested in monopolizing the market,” that it could meet projected demand, the lawsuit said.
It called the FDA’s action “arbitrary, capricious and contrary to law.”
Then, the FDA agreed to reconsider its decision; staying the lawsuit.
The agency said in a court filing it would now allow compounding pharmacies and facilities to keep providing the drugs while it reviews whether there is a shortage of their active ingredient. Outsourcing Facilities Association Chairman Lee Rosebush said in a statement the group was “greatly relieved, for our members and the many patients that they serve, that the FDA has agreed to reconsider its decision.”
The Outsourcing Facilities Association claimed in its lawsuit the FDA removed tirzepatide from its shortage list even though it remained in short supply.
Lilly in August began sending cease-and-desist letters to telehealth companies, wellness centers and medical spas selling compounded versions of Zepbound and Mounjaro. The company has also filed lawsuits against sellers falsely claiming to sell FDA-approved versions of the drug.
Is there a shortage of tirzepatide? Dunno. How is current supply/demand calculated? How is projected supply/demand calculated? Given the number of drugs on the shortage list, one would think that there are standard metrics for making such conclusions. But perhaps it’s a judgment call, and there’s flexibility.
So, what’s next?
I think the GLP-1 compounding party will soon be over. But I think other options will open up.
There will be tremendous pressure for the pharmaceutical companies to lower their prices. The drug does not cost much to manufacture, and they can still make their top line revenue numbers, and continue to make a fortune.
New competitors will be coming on line soon, putting more price pressure on established players.
Next carriers will be under pressure. Carriers can also push for price concessions from pharma. Given the health benefits, carriers should be motivated. Because they’re on the hook for costs associated with obesity and diabetes.
There may be options for individual patients to import from Canada or other countries.
And Congress can act. Or can it?
Anyway, the country got used to low cost GLP-1 medications, and given that such medications are intended for chronic use, it’s hard to see how the country will make nice and go back to accepting expensive medications with the supply constrained by limited insurance coverage. The US is a noisy country. And this issue may get a lot more attention than some of the other political issues in the news.
Filed under: General Problems | 2 Comments »
Why does a woman have a “A fundamental freedom to make decision about their own body” when it comes to the health issue of pregnancy, but when it comes to the treatment of both acute and chronic pain, she seems to have less – or no – right to make a decision about her own body?
Our Founding Fathers declared in our
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
Who believes that our Founding Fathers intended that their successors would create definitions for and micromanage what the meaning of our unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness are?
Our Founding Fathers – in their 18th century vocabulary and mindset – stated that ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL. 250 yrs later, there is so little equality or equity in our society. Are “we” too segregated into too many “tribes” to get our society back on the track our Founding Fathers initially put us on?
Based on the search results provided, there is no specific statistic given for the exact number of women in the USA dealing with intractable chronic pain who are being denied adequate or no pain management. However, the search results do provide some relevant information about chronic pain in women:
1. Women are disproportionately affected by chronic pain compared to men. According to a CDC report, 21% of women reported chronic pain, compared to 19% of men. Additionally, 8.5% of women reported high-impact chronic pain (pain that frequently limits life or work activities), compared to 6.3% of men[1].
2. Women are more likely to experience chronic pain conditions compared to men. Some conditions that are more common in women include migraine, musculoskeletal pain, fibromyalgia, rheumatoid and osteoarthritis, irritable bowel syndrome, and neuropathic pain[2].
3. Women often face challenges in having their pain recognized and taken seriously by healthcare providers. They are more likely to encounter skepticism regarding the severity or legitimacy of their symptoms due to gender biases and cultural norms[2].
4. Women are more likely to receive prescriptions for sedatives rather than pain medication for their ailments. One study showed that women who received coronary bypass surgery were only half as likely to be prescribed painkillers compared to men who had undergone the same procedure[3].
5. Women wait an average of 65 minutes before receiving an analgesic for acute abdominal pain in the ER in the United States, while men wait only 49 minutes[3].
6. 70% of people impacted by chronic pain are women, yet 80% of pain studies are conducted on male mice or human men[3].
While these statistics don’t directly answer the query about the number of women denied adequate pain management, they do suggest that there are significant disparities in how women’s pain is perceived, diagnosed, and treated in the healthcare system. This implies that many women may indeed be receiving inadequate pain management, though the exact number is not provided in the search results.
Citations:
[1] https://medicine.yale.edu/news-article/for-many-women-pain-is-still-a-problem/
[2] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10937548/
[3] https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/women-and-pain-disparities-in-experience-and-treatment-2017100912562
[4] https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8119594/
[5] https://www.iasp-pain.org/advocacy/global-year/pain-in-women/
[6] https://journals.lww.com/jbjsjournal/Fulltext/2020/05201/Sex_and_Gender_Issues_in_Pain_Management.7.aspx
[7] https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/72/wr/mm7215a1.htm
[8] https://www.washingtonpost.com/wellness/interactive/2022/women-pain-gender-bias-doctors/
Filed under: General Problems | 2 Comments »
Being a native Hoosier, I have always considered Indiana to be a fiscally conservative state. Apparently the PBM’s “dog and pony show” pull the fiscal wool over those who work for the state to sign up with a PBM who is known to have rather opaque financial disclosures. One of the PBMs that Indiana signed up for was the infamous Optum Rx that is owned by United Health.
From www.perplexity.ai:
Medicaid Programs
For Indiana’s Medicaid programs:
INDIANAPOLIS — Indiana lawmakers are calling for more oversight of “pharmacy benefit managers,” or “PBMs” for short, following a report presented to the Health Care Cost Oversight Task Force this week.
PBMs act as middlemen between drug manufacturers and insurance companies and play a huge role in deciding what Americans pay at the pharmacy.
Due to concerns over rising prescription drug costs, the General Assembly passed a bill this year calling for an audit of the state’s plans with PBMS—an audit some lawmakers said demonstrates PBMs aren’t working in the state’s best interests.
“If the PBMs were by design to be saving the state money, they have failed miserably,” State Sen. Andy Zay (R-Marion) said.
According to that preliminary report, Indiana paid $7 billion to administer prescription drug benefits for Hoosiers enrolled in the state’s Medicaid program and state employee plan through FY 2017 through FY 2022.
”To put that into maybe a more human perspective, $1,000 out of every Hoosier’s hands is given to the state to pay for these folks and these drugs over the past five years,” State Sen. Zay said.
The company behind the report, RxConnection, LLC, said a contractual loophole called “off-setting language” allows PBMs to keep more money they’re supposed to pay back to the state.
”Indiana is one of the few states that allows this to even happen to begin with, and so that’s an area that definitely needs to be addressed,” State Sen. Andrea Hunley (D-Indianapolis) said.
”That [off-setting] language makes no sense to me,” State Sen. Ed Charbonneau (R-Valparaiso) said.
State Sen. Zay recommended creating a state-run PBM, eliminating rebates, or ensuring all pharmacies are in network to address the issue. A date for the task force’s next meeting has yet to be released.
Although an addendum to the report is expected to be released in the next few weeks, lawmakers expressed frustration that the final report may not include certain proprietary information about PBMs—information they said could be crucial for them to lower prescription drug costs effectively.
”There are many ways for them to embargo information and release that, I mean that is a practice that is done all of the time, and the fact that they couldn’t figure that out ahead of our meeting, I’m going to call B.S. on,” State Sen. Hunley said.
“I don’t care what PBM attorneys think or don’t think,” State Sen. Chris Garten (R-Charlestown) said. “And I don’t care what lawsuits may or may not come. I care about getting this under control for Hoosiers…if the AG’s Office has had to issue a civil investigative demand, that’s pretty damning in my opinion.”
The Indiana Attorney General’s Office said it cannot comment on the matter until the report is completed.
Filed under: General Problems | Leave a Comment »
https://www.clinicaladvisor.com/features/failure-prescribe-pain-medications-suicide/
Mr M was a 48-year-old married man with 3 children. He had been seeing his primary care physician (PCP) regularly since 2005 for chronic, debilitating cervical pain. The patient had been diagnosed with multi-level degenerative disc disease and cervical radiculopathy stemming from injuries he sustained in a car accident in his 20’s. The patient was prescribed opioid medications for pain management by his previous PCP, starting in 2005.
Mr M took his medication as prescribed and showed up for his medical appointments. By 2017, the patient was on a combination of medications to manage his pain including morphine sulfate (60 mg 3 times a day), oxycodone/paracetamol (5/324 mg every 4 hours, as needed), and zolpidem (10 mg/d),
In late February 2017, Mr M was told that his PCP was retiring in a few weeks and he should find a new primary care provider. He set up an appointment to establish care at another clinic but his first appointment was not until May. In early April, Mr M filled his final prescription from his PCP. By early May, the patient had run out of medication but was unable to get an earlier PCP appointment.
In severe intractable pain, Mr M went to his local emergency department (ED) in mid-May, the day before his new PCP appointment. He told the ED providers that his morphine sulfate prescription had lapsed the previous day. He explained that his physician had retired and he was unable to get an appointment with a new primary care provider until the next day.
Mr M was given 1 dose of morphine sulfate in the ED and was then sent home with instructions to follow up with his primary care provider. The next morning, he went to his appointment at the new clinic. There he was assigned to a physician associate (PA). The PA examined the patient but did not refill Mr M’s opioid prescriptions. Because the PA did not take thorough notes, there was no mention in the patient’s record of why he refused to refill the prescriptions, or whether he consulted with any of the 4 supervising physicians at the practice.
What is known is that the PA did not renew the existing prescriptions and sent the patient home without pain medication. Mr M experienced severe withdrawal from the morphine, and, feeling hopeless, died by suicide the following day. He was survived by a wife and 3 children.
The patient’s widow hired an attorney who sued the PA and all 4 of the supervising physicians at the clinic. Discovery began, and the plaintiff’s attorney retained an expert physician to go over Mr M’s medical records.
The expert physician concluded that there was evidence of medical negligence in the treatment of Mr M. Specifically, the expert noted that the care provided by the PA and his supervisors fell below the appropriate standard of care required in such a case. The expert’s report alleged that the PA and his supervisors had:
The expert’s list of the clinicians’ failures was extensive and blamed the supervising physicians as well for failing the patient.
The case was settled out of court for an unpublished amount. It is unclear why the family did not sue the original PCP who retired and left his long-time patient without any direction.
We cannot tell from the facts in this case why the PA declined to renew Mr M’s prescriptions. The doses of opioids may have been higher than the PA was used to seeing in a primary care practice.
There were many mistakes in this case. The retiring PCP left his patient without clear instructions or referral to a pain specialist. He should have helped Mr M find a new provider who would continue the opioids, or he should have helped the patient to taper off his medications before he left his practice. Instead, the PCP retired and left his patient with no continuity of care.
It is not clear whether the PA had access to Mr M’s previous medical records at the time of their meeting. However, not treating a patient who is opioid-dependent is negligent. Mr M was not offered anything to help with his pain or offered medical management of his opioid withdrawal, a short prescription for pain relief, or a referral to a pain specialist. He was sent home in physical pain with no recourse.
We are all aware of the opioid “epidemic” in this country and the hazards that these medications can bring, but that should never be an excuse to deprive a patient of desperately needed help.
Ann W. Latner, JD, a former criminal defense attorney, is a freelance medical writer in Port Washington, New York.
Filed under: General Problems | 7 Comments »
CUTHBERT, Ga. — While customers at Adams Family Pharmacy picked up their prescriptions on a hot summer day, some stopped in for coffee, ice cream, homemade cake, or cookies.
It wasn’t a bake sale, but the sweets bring extra revenue as pharmacist and co-owner Nikki Bryant works to achieve profitability at her business on the town square.
Bryant said she is doing all she can to bolster it against a powerful force that threatens her and other independent pharmacists: the middlemen who manage virtually all prescriptions written in the U.S., called pharmacy benefit managers, or PBMs. Serving as brokers among drugmakers, pharmacies, and health insurers, these health care entities have drawn scrutiny from Congress, the Federal Trade Commission, and state legislatures for their role in the increase in drug prices.
Bryant and other independent pharmacists say PBMs not only create higher costs but also make it harder for patients to access medications. So they were hopeful about state legislation this year that would have increased their reimbursement to match the average prices paid to retail chain pharmacies through the state employee health plan. But Gov. Brian Kemp vetoed the bill.
Kemp cited a fiscal estimate that it would cost the state as much as $45 million a year and said “the General Assembly failed to fund this initiative.”
Underlining the Georgia legislative reform effort against pharmacy benefit managers was an analysis by the American Pharmacy Cooperative, which represents independent pharmacies, that reviewed the price differential paid to a north Georgia pharmacy and nearby chain stores.
The analysis early this year showed chains were paid well beyond the family business for many of the same medications: For example, the chains received an average of nearly $54 for the antidepressant bupropion, while Bell’s Family Pharmacy in Tate, Georgia, got $5.54, the analysis said. For a drug used to treat blood pressure, amlodipine, chain pharmacies received an average of $23.55, while Bell’s got $1.51.
Bell’s Family Pharmacy closed earlier this year.
“The differences in Georgia are unbelievable,” Antonio Ciaccia, who runs Ohio-based consulting firm 3 Axis Advisors. “If you’re a pharmacist, you don’t have any control over which drugs you dispense and which you don’t.”
By controlling prices and availability, pharmacy benefit managers cause patients and employers to spend more for medications, according to the Federal Trade Commission and pharmacy groups. On Sept. 20, the FTC sued three of the largest PBMs — CVS Health’s Caremark, Cigna’s Express Scripts, and UnitedHealth Group’s Optum Rx, which together control about 80% of U.S. prescription drug sales. The agency said they created a “perverse drug rebate system” that artificially inflates the price of insulin. Each company denied the allegations.
The lawsuit followed a scathing FTC report in July that said the “dominant PBMs can often exercise significant control over which drugs are available, at what price, and which pharmacies patients can use to access their prescribed medications.”
The trade group that represents PBMs, the Pharmaceutical Care Management Association, said the insulin market is working well and blamed drugmakers for historically higher prices of the medication.
Bryant and other independent pharmacists, though, say they lose money filling certain prescriptions while reimbursements favor chain pharmacies like CVS that have corporate ties to pharmacy benefit managers. And even the chain pharmacies have retrenched, with CVS, Rite Aid, and Walgreens announcing layoffs or store closures in recent months.
“PBMs are like the mafia,” Bryant said. “They pay us what they want to pay us. They are sucking all the money out of health care.”
Pharmacy benefit managers will charge some health insurance plans more for a medication than what they reimburse a pharmacy, keeping the extra money as profit, critics say. This practice is known as “spread pricing.” Large PBMs also take money from drugmakers as a “rebate” to give their drugs preferential treatment on health plans’ lists of medications, independent pharmacies say. And by favoring certain pharmacies with whom they have business ties, experts say, these drug brokers help force independent stores such as Bell’s to close.
The veto by Kemp, a Republican, came despite the GOP-led General Assembly voting overwhelmingly for Senate Bill 198 on the last day of the legislative session.
Kemp spokesperson Garrison Douglas said, “The governor remains entirely and wholeheartedly supportive of Georgia’s independent pharmacists and the need for PBM transparency.”
In his veto message, Kemp voiced support for a study of independent pharmacy drug reimbursements and PBM practices. And he said independent pharmacists are getting an extra $3 dispensing fee this year on state employee prescriptions.
The state Department of Community Health, which oversees the State Health Benefit Plan, told KFF Health News that CVS Caremark, the PBM handling the state employee business, supplied the cost estimate Kemp used to justify his veto.
Fiona Roberts, a spokesperson for Community Health, said the department didn’t have time to conduct its own analysis.
CVS Caremark said it used historical claims data to calculate the cost impact of the higher reimbursement.
Nationally, criticism of PBM practices intensified over the summer with the Federal Trade Commission report.
The Pharmaceutical Care Management Association pushed back, saying the report “is based on anecdotes and comments from anonymous sources and self-interested parties and supported only by two cherry-picked case studies that are implied to be representative of the entire market.”
Members of both parties in Congress have tackled PBM reform. House members recently introduced another proposal, known as the Pharmacists Fight Back Act, which supporters say would add transparency, limit costs for patients, ensure they get the benefit of drugmaker discounts, and protect their pharmacy choices.
The consolidation that has combined health insurers with PBMs — including their operating their own retail, mail-order, and specialty pharmacies — has created financial behemoths, said U.S. Rep. Buddy Carter, a Georgia Republican and a pharmacist. “I’m interested in busting them up,” he said.
Alexander Oshmyansky, co-founder of Mark Cuban Cost Plus Drug Company, said the PBMs siphon off about a third of the $400 billion a year spent on pharmaceuticals.
“What we could do as a society with $100 billion as opposed to paying some companies to process drug payments,” Oshmyansky said.
PCMA, the trade group, cited a report funded by the three biggest pharmacy benefit managers that said their operating margins are less than 5%.
And the group says that discussions about congressional reform “reflect a one-sided view informed directly by the pharmaceutical industry’s blame game designed to vilify PBMs to keep prescription drug prices high and increase drug company profits.”
Underpayments by PBMs, however, have accelerated the closures of mom-and-pop pharmacies across the country, said the National Community Pharmacists Association, which represents independent pharmacies.
The U.S. loses almost one such pharmacy a day, said Anne Cassity, a senior vice president of the association. Rural pharmacies, which are hard to reach for patients lacking transportation, are especially vulnerable, she said.
Bryant’s two pharmacies deliver to several counties, including to patients who have a disability or no transportation. The cost to patients: zero.
Most states have passed some version of oversight or restrictions on pharmacy benefit managers.
In Montana, state officials have collected financial reports from pharmacy benefit managers over the past two years after passing a bill to promote transparency in these businesses.
Data from 2022 shows that rebates in Montana rarely are directly returned to people buying prescriptions. Instead, they’re pocketed by the PBMs or returned to health plans.
Josh Morris, who owns three independent rural pharmacies in southwestern Montana, said his pharmacies have seen reimbursement rates for medications bought under PBM-managed plans drop.
Morris said his business routinely either breaks even or loses money. “Our plan is that once we reach a certain level of cash, that we will be out,” Morris said. “As in ‘closed.’”
Frank Cote, with Montana’s insurance commissioner’s office, said that the state has tried to make business easier for small pharmacies but that state officials still don’t control how much PBMs pay. Cote said the state will look for ways within existing rules or future legislation to support rural pharmacies.
Following Kemp’s veto in Georgia, the pharmacy pay differential sparked criticism from an unusual place: within the board of the state Department of Community Health, the agency that runs the State Health Benefit Plan.
Mark Shane Mobley, a board member, said at an August meeting that independent pharmacies’ pay in the state employee plan should be on par with a chain’s. The PBM profit “is going to line people’s pockets that are far outside of the state,” said Mobley, president of Avilys Sleep & EEG, a Georgia provider of sleep disorder and electroencephalogram testing. “Our independent pharmacies, they’re hiring people locally. They’re taking care of the local community.”
Community Health Commissioner Russel Carlson said the agency has an ongoing dialogue with CVS Caremark, the PBM handling the state employee plan medications.
“We don’t have our head in the sand. We know there are some frustrations out there that exist in this space,” he said. “But we acknowledge that we do have contractual responsibilities.”
In Cuthbert, Bryant said she can make more profit on cake and coffee than with many medications.
Still, she’s in business while a nearby CVS pharmacy closed recently. “We outcompeted them on service,” Bryant said.
Filed under: General Problems | Leave a Comment »
I find it interesting that when Humulin was introduced to the market place in 1982 a 10 ml vial was ~ $14.50. Using a COLA calculator in today dollars that is ~ $47.50. However, this Administration fabricated a price limit on insulin of $35 PER MONTH.
The estimated type-1 diabetic insulin needs would be:
Most patients with type 1 diabetes require an insulin dosage of 0.5 to 1.0 unit per kg of body weight per day
So the feds have limited the cost of a month’s worth of insulin to $35. Whereas, everything being left alone, the cost of 3 vials would have been $142.50. Who is going to “make up” the ~ $800.00/yr that the pharma would have generated in gross revenue over a year for a “high end” insulin user?
Likewise, with the Feds basically mandating “free birth control tablets”. The new OTC BC is $180.00/yr.
What about women who need a specific brand of birth control? Whose price is upwards of $130/month ($1,560/yr) There is ~ 100 million females of child bearing age (15 y/o -49 y/o). Using the average of $70/month for BC medications. That is a potential $7 TRILLION/yr in costs for providing BC medications for our current female population.
I guess “we” can add to that $$ figure whatever the cost is for women who doesn’t brother with any pregnancy prevention and still use abortions as a form of birth control.
https://www.medpagetoday.com/obgyn/pregnancy/112489
Roughly 52 million women with private health insurance will have increased access to contraception under a proposed rule announced Monday by the Biden administration.
“Since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, reproductive healthcare has been under attack,” HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra said on a phone call with reporters Friday. “That means preventative services like contraception are more important than ever, and when healthcare plans and issuers impose unduly burdensome administrative or cost-sharing requirements for services, access to contraceptives becomes even more difficult.”
The proposed rule, issued by HHS and the departments of Labor and Treasury, would:
“Dangerous and extreme abortion bans are putting women’s health and lives at risk and disrupting access to critical healthcare services, including contraception, as healthcare providers are forced to close,” Jennifer Klein, director of the Gender Policy Council at the White House, said on the call. “In states across the country, Republican elected officials in states have made clear that they plan to ban or restrict birth control in addition to abortion, and Republicans in Congress have proposed to defund Title X family planning and have blocked federal legislation that would safeguard nationwide access to contraception.” The proposed rule represents “the most significant expansion of contraception coverage under the Affordable Care Act in more than a decade,” she added.
Becerra noted that “We have heard from women who need a specific brand of birth control, but the cost of their prescription isn’t covered by their health insurance. We have made clear that in all 50 states, the Affordable Care Act guarantees coverage of women’s preventative services … including all birth control methods approved by the FDA.”
President Biden also weighed in on the rule. “At a time when contraception access is under attack, Vice President Harris and I are resolute in our commitment to expanding access to quality, affordable contraception,” he said in a statement. “We believe that women in every state must have the freedom to make deeply personal healthcare decisions, including the right to decide if and when to start or grow their family. We will continue to fight to protect access to reproductive healthcare and call on Congress to restore reproductive freedom and safeguard the right to contraception once and for all.”
On the call, Becerra added that in addition to the contraception provisions, HHS and the Labor and Treasury departments are issuing new guidance “to help ensure that consumers can access other recommended preventative services without cost-sharing. This new guidance will address barriers and challenges related to coverage of preventative services like pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) and colonoscopies that must be covered under the Affordable Care Act.”
Filed under: General Problems | Leave a Comment »
Filed under: General Problems | Leave a Comment »
Should Clinicians Be Liable for Patient Suicide After Failing to Prescribe Pain Medications?
Another person made the following comment on that blog post