US drugs r costly because we allow drug companies to milk patents

Trans-Pacific Partnership Reveals Deadly Cost of American Patents
Posted on March 11, 2014 by Yves Smith


"While US news stories occasionally mention the high cost of most medications, they skirt the issue of why American drugs are so grotesquely overpriced by world standards.   (Its cheaper to buy them EVERYWHERE else).  The pharmaceutical industry has managed to sell the story that it’s because they need all that dough to pay for the cost of finding new drugs.  That is a LIE.
First, part of the story the drug industry chooses to omit is that a substantial portion of drug R&D, and the riskiest part (basic research) is heavily funded by the National Institutes of Health and other government agencies.
 
It’s hard to put all the data together, but the latest estimates I’ve seen put the total funded by the government at over 30%.
Second, Big Pharma spends more on marketing than on R&D.   And it markets in the most costly manner possible:   in person sales calls to  doctors.  (aka "small business owners").   The fact that it is worth it to sell in such an exceptionally high cost manner is proof of fat margins [the marginal value of a sale to the company and the commission given the salesperson supports such a costly sales effort].
Third, the "TransPacific Partnership" is one of the big reasons US drugs are so costly is we allow drug companies to milk patents to a degree that is UNHEARD OF (unparalleled) elsewhere.    Consider this section of an article from The Star (Malaysia) by Martin Khor:

'It’s really a matter of life and death. For the TPPA can cut off the potential supply of cheaper generic life-saving medicines, especially when the branded products are priced so sky-high that very few can afford them.
The fight for cheaper medicines has moved to cancer and other deadly diseases, when once the controversy was over AIDS medicines.
Last week, a cancer specialist in New Zealand (one of the TPPA countries) warned that the TPPA would prolong the high cost of treating breast cancer because of new rules to protect biotechnology-based cancer drugs from competition from generics. And this will affect the lives of cancer patients.
Some cancer medicines can cost a patient over US$100,000 (RM329,600) for a year’s treatment, way above what an ordinary family can afford.   But generic versions could be produced for a very small fraction of the cost of a brand name, making it possible for patients not to die. 
In India, local companies are leading the fight to make medicines more affordable to thousands suffering from breast, kidney, liver and gastrointestinal cancer and chronic leukeamia.
For example, an Indian company produced a generic drug for kidney and liver cancer 30 times cheaper than the brand name product – US$140 (RM461) versus US$4,580 (RM15,100) for a month’s treatment – after it was given a compulsory license.
India has a patent law that disallows patents for newer forms of drugs or known substances unless it improves the medicine’s efficacy or effectiveness.  Under WTO rules, countries are free to set their own standards for novelty, or whether a product is novel enough to be eligible for a patent.
Also, in many countries, including Malaysia, the patent law allows for companies to obtain compulsory licences to import or make generic versions of original medicines'

First, US pharmaceutical companies have been willing to sell drugs in foreign, including third world countries, even though the intellectual property regimes are not as favorable as in the US.   That means the profit levels, even if less rich, are high enough to make it worth it to sell in poor countries.  SAME PRODUCT bought in a different country by the same manufacturer and its super cheap, compared to USA where its super expensive.  wtf?  
Indeed, the drug regime in the US looks a lot like the electronics business in Japan in the 1980s, where products in the domestic market were priced much higher than in the rest of the world.  However, electronics is NOT a product that is critical to a person's survival.
Second, for the last 20 years, the big drug companies have done very little new drug research - so where is all this money going?  In their own pockets, of course.  
For instance, a drug might have been originally formulated to be taken once every eight hours. The very same drug, formulated now so that it need be taken only once a day, would count in the US as a new drug application and thus extend the patent life and sell the drug only as a brand name (and at the much higher price).  
 
That is why the distinction made in India is critically important:
“India has a patent law that disallows patents for newer forms of drugs or known substances unless it improves the medicine’s efficacy or effectiveness.”
It nixes the sort of patent gaming that has become widespread in the USA.
 
Third, it is quite likely that the profitability of milking patents in USA has actually discouraged investment in finding new drugs.
 
Big Pharma claims there's "no need for research".  Which is completely UNTRUE.   Cancer medications are limited, and don't work most of the time with terrible side effects.   Infections are often antibiotic resistant.   Drug resistant tuberculosis is rising.   The treatment for autoimmune diseases are symptom-suppressants not cures and stop working after awhile.   We don’t have a treatment for Alzheimers or multiple sclerosis (for the latter, beyond somewhat delaying progress of the disease).
The fight over the TPP and the TransAtlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, has not lead to reforms of America’s Pharmaceutical Industry ["extortionate drug regime"].   But at least the U.S. drug companies haven't been successful in recruiting other countries to insisting on HIGH profit pharmaceuticals instead of cheaply helping people who are ill.  
YOU CAN BUY THE SAME PHARMACEUTICALS from other countries for a small fraction of what you pay here.  Don't buy pharmaceuticals in USA.