"When government officials propose policies that set prices for life-saving medicines, the idea can sound simple: make prescription drugs more affordable and easier to access. But history, economics, and global experience tell a much different story. Government price controls, including importing other countries' price caps through most favored nation policies, may be well-intentioned, but they consistently lead to fewer treatment options, slower innovation, and worse outcomes for patients."
"China's healthcare system is a stark example: despite major investments in research, centralized price-setting and procurement have created long delays in availability of new therapies, persistent shortages and wide disparities in patients' access to care. Closer to home, Cuba's decades-long reliance on government-controlled pricing has produced even more severe gaps in access to health care, with chronic shortages of the most basic medical supplies, let alone advanced treatments."
Government price controls on medicines consistently produce fewer treatment options, slower innovation, supply shortages, longer waits for treatment, and worse patient outcomes. Importing other countries' price caps or applying most-favored-nation rules reduces incentives for pharmaceutical research and development. In China, centralized price-setting and procurement have delayed availability of new therapies, produced persistent shortages, and created wide disparities in patient access. In Cuba, longstanding government-controlled pricing has led to chronic shortages of basic medical supplies and severe gaps in access to advanced treatments. In Europe, price caps and rationing correlated with large declines in pharmaceutical research investment and delayed patient access to new medicines.
Read at www.amny.com
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]