'Our Cancer Drug Is For Rich Westerners, Not Poor Indians'
The Young Turks・2 minutes read
A cancer drug approved by the FDA costs $69,000 annually in the US, while an Indian court granted a patent to produce it for $177 in India, sparking a debate on corporate profit motives. The original company's CEO's discontent with the decision may affect their appeal in court by highlighting the profit-driven nature of pharmaceutical companies.
Insights
- India's law allows for the production of cancer drug Nexavar at a significantly lower cost compared to the US, enabling wider accessibility to life-saving medications.
- The CEO's statement regarding the drug being developed for Western patients who can afford it raises ethical questions about corporate profit motives in the pharmaceutical industry, sparking a debate on the balance between profits and moral obligations.
Get key ideas from YouTube videos. It’s free
Recent questions
What is the controversy surrounding Nexavar drug pricing?
The controversy stems from the stark difference in pricing between the US and India for the cancer drug Nexavar. While the drug costs $69,000 per year in the US, an Indian court granted a patent to Natco Pharma to produce it for $177, a 97% discount. The original company's CEO expressed dissatisfaction with this decision, arguing that the drug was intended for Western patients who could afford it, sparking a debate on corporate profit motives versus morality.
How does India regulate drug pricing?
India has a law that allows companies to produce generic versions of drugs at a lower cost if the original company charges excessively. This was exemplified in the case of Nexavar, where an Indian court granted a patent to Natco Pharma to sell the drug for $177, significantly lower than the US price of $69,000 per year.
What impact does insurance have on Nexavar drug cost in the US?
In the US, insurance companies cover most of the $69,000 cost of Nexavar, resulting in an average cost of $96,000 per year for patients. This high cost, despite insurance coverage, has raised concerns about the affordability and accessibility of life-saving medications.
Why did the CEO of the original company oppose the Indian court's decision?
The CEO opposed the Indian court's decision to grant a patent to Natco Pharma to produce Nexavar at a lower cost because he believed the drug was developed for Western patients who could afford the high price. This stance highlights the tension between corporate profit motives and the ethical considerations of making essential medications accessible to all individuals in need.
What ethical considerations are raised by the Nexavar drug pricing debate?
The debate surrounding Nexavar's pricing raises ethical questions about the balance between corporate profit motives and the moral obligation to provide life-saving medications at an affordable cost. The CEO's statement regarding the drug being intended for wealthier Western patients underscores the challenges in reconciling profit-driven decisions with the broader societal impact of pharmaceutical pricing policies.
Related videos
DW Documentary
The power of the pharmaceutical companies | DW Documentary
DW Documentary
Big Pharma - How much power do drug companies have? | DW Documentary
CNBC
Why Pharmaceuticals Are So Complicated In The U.S. | CNBC Marathon
DW Documentary
The power of the pharmaceutical companies | DW Documentary
The Young Turks
Big Pharma: We're Going To Sue Medicare Over Price Regulations
Summary
00:00
Global Debate Over Drug Pricing and Morality
- In 2005, the FDA approved a cancer drug called Nexavar to treat late-stage kidney and liver cancer, but it comes with a high cost of $69,000 per year in the US.
- India has a law allowing companies to produce the same drug at a lower cost if the original company charges excessively. An Indian court granted a patent to Natco Pharma, enabling the drug to be sold for $177 in India, a 97% discount from the US price.
- The CEO of the original company expressed discontent with the Indian court's decision, stating the drug was developed for Western patients who can afford it, not for Indians. This sparked a debate on corporate profit motives versus morality.
- While the drug costs $69,000 in the US, insurance companies cover most of it, resulting in an average cost of $96,000 per year. The CEO's statement may hinder their appeal in court, as it highlights the profit-driven nature of pharmaceutical companies.
