Good I hope they all go out of business they have been ripping people off for years.
Oddly enough, it’s at least a monopoly in the spirit of the law and shouldn’t be allowed. In the free enterprise system, competition along with supply and demand should govern prices. Obviously if you artificially restrict supply, you up the demand and therefore the price. Of course, this isn’t about economics–it’s really about being fair to the consumer and offering many choices, not purposely offering only a few (and you own the few offered).
This is a pretty definitive article and explains the major push I’ve seen in television ads for consumers to “talk to your doctor about [medication X]…” Part of the rest of the problem is that hospitals and clinics get surprisingly large, FREE amounts of samples of medications (which are sometimes dispensed to low-income Americans who can’t afford buying it). Obviously such large quantities don’t come free–someone pays for them.
Regardless, the biggest problem is the outright amorality or at least ‘situation ethics’ of it all: so long as someone doesn’t get busted for something (that is obviously wrong), it must be ‘ok.’
Agreed, but with the proviso that I’d prefer that they’d just spend their money on research, rather than shareholders
Notice how with like burners and cameras, that the push seems to be (at least in the US) to get new drugs as a matter of solving an inconvenient problem (like the pill for psoriasis, Enbrel), when something as common as hydrocortizone cream worked well? Seems like the push is more to get something ‘new’ out rather than thoroughly researching if it will really work and not have such damaging side effects.