cross-posted from: https://mander.xyz/post/11304633

Ozempic maker Novo Nordisk facing pressure as study finds $1,000 appetite suppressant can be made for just $5

  • seriousconsideration@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    9 months ago

    Ever since Ozempic became more profitable to sell to fat people looking for an easy weight loss hack rather than the diabetics who actually needed it, we’ve seen nothing but bullshit attributed to the drug.

    • pearsaltchocolatebar@discuss.online
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      9 months ago

      No medicines have copyrights, but they do have patents. And, drug patents are kinda necessary if you want money to be spent on developing new drugs.

      No one is going to dump a few hundred million into developing a new drug if everyone can manufacture and sell it upon release.

      Patents aren’t the issue, though, it’s companies charging out the ass because they can.

      • Sneezycat@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        9 months ago

        Publicly funded research is out of the question then? Why does it have to be private corporations doing the research?

      • Io Sapsai 🌱@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        9 months ago

        Oh, the patent expired? No problem, we’ll just methylate the structure, see that it makes no difference and put it out on the market as a new drug. Or maybe take the active part of a racemic mixture and half the dosage. Same drug double the patent. Semisynthetic insulin is even worse in that regard.

      • mr_pink@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        No one is going to dump a few hundred million into developing a new drug if everyone can manufacture and sell it upon release.

        You won’t sell it on the market because you have to produce it cheaper or at the same cost as the competition. You don’t have the knowledge to produce the drug efficiently, and you can’t learn that by looking at the end product. In a society without IP, the most important things are the optimised production processes, which will be kept secret. The rest can be copied because it will be more expensive to produce.

  • 0xvalentin@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    9 months ago

    I read the article and I don’t think it factors in the upfront cost of R&D, Compliance, etc, so that’s basically a fantasy number.

    • seriousconsideration@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      You’re probably right. It’s more than likely the cost per dose. Which is also what the $1000 figure represents.

      The Vermont independent (Bernie) called on Novo Nordisk to lower the list price of Ozempic to $155 a month or less, in line with what it charges in other countries.

      Somehow they can justify selling it for $155 a dose (per month?) in other countries while still making a profit above the overhead and compliance costs.

    • Banzai51@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      9 months ago

      Those are the costs of doing business, and can be greatly exaggerated. And other counties produce profitable drugs even with price restrictions. We’re so accustomed to price gouging, that we don’t recognize it.