Do pharmacists have an influence over med prices set by pharmaceutical companies?

[Minghoo]

I was wondering does any current pharmacists or pharmacy students or anyone else that knows whether pharmacists have any control over the price of drugs that pharmaceutical companies sell? Or are pharmacists only the dispensers? I know that new drugs usually go through some sort of clinical trial and pharmacists over see these trials, so does this have an effect on the price. I also know that a lot drugs are expensive because there is no generic drug for tha same drug, but honestly the prices are just ridiculous. Let me know what you guys think?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[loo]

No. The only thing we negotiate for is reimbursement from 3rd party insurances. I am speaking from the retail pharmacy level.

If a had a dime for each time somebody (especially the "educated" consumer who feels we "overcharge" ) asks this question...

loo

 

[kren]

No. the price of the drug is set by the pharmaceutical company. even for generics, the price is set by the manufacturer. and the prices of generics are starting to rise. there are many generics out there that are priced the same as, or even higher than, brands for the first 6mos-1yr or sometimes >1yr. there exist different prices within the distribution chain (as loo stated in one example), but all of these prices are based on the price set by pharma.

 

[Minghoo]

Why do pharm manufacturers do this? Is there no middle ground or they just simply wnat to maximize their profits in a short amount of time since they spent so much time researching their drugs?

 

[Caverject]

Why do pharm manufacturers do this? Is there no middle ground or they just simply wnat to maximize their profits in a short amount of time since they spent so much time researching their drugs?

Simple answer to your question. The answer is capitalism. All that matters is the all mighty dollar! Hope this helps

 

[jdpharmd?]

Glaxo has some great promotional materials that have SOME truth to them. I can't find the same materials on their web site. Basically, a new drug takes a ton of money to develop because almost every drug fails. The one drug that works and gets approved has to make up for the 99 drugs that failed after 1-100 million dollars was invested in each one. Oh, and lots of DTC advertising.

 

[imperial frog]

Why do pharm manufacturers do this? Is there no middle ground or they just simply wnat to maximize their profits in a short amount of time since they spent so much time researching their drugs?

Yes, not that there's anything wrong with that. Developing a new drug takes a lot of time and money, not to mention the cost of research that eventually leads nowhere. Throw in the limited amount of time a manufacturer has name-brand exclusivity before a generic can kick in and you have the basis for the need to maximize the profits in the short run before another company can reap the benefits of not having massive R&D expenses.

 

[dgroulx]

A patent for a drug is good for 20 years and it takes 15 years to bring a drug to market. The average cost to do this is 300-600 million dollars. The drug company has 5 years to make back all this money plus all the R & D for the drugs that did not get approved. If it was not a profitable enterprise, no one would do any research for new drugs.

 

[imperial frog]

Not to mention the lawsuits and settlements.