[Villages Kahuna]

Veterans and active duty military have enjoyed the significant benefits of negotiated drug prices for years. Both the VA and the Department of Defense have effectively negotiated drug prices for years. Just because the lobbyists for Big Pharma paid off members of Congress in exchange for their promise to never even permit the negotiation of drug prices to come up for a vote?

What about the rest of us?

[Topspinmo]

Originally Posted by jdulej

I'm hoping we'll finally see an administration with the balls to stand up to the pressure and fulfill their promises. It'll be a first, but I am hopeful.

Not going to happen when you have representative’s that don’t even read bills. The most famous was we have to pass it to see what’s in it.

[TSO/ISPF]

Originally Posted by Villages Kahuna

Veterans have enjoyed the significant benefits of negotiated drug prices for years. Just because the lobbyists for Big Pharma paid off members of Congress for their promise never to even permit the negotiation of drug prices to come up for a vote?

What about the rest of us?

I wonder if there is a Veteran willing to offer his/her cost for 90 day supply of Eliquis. Only because we know that number for Canadian
suppliers and it would be an apples to apples comparison. I am a vet
but don't qualify for the benefits. I am on Medicare and paying for a
Part D supplement insurance policy from UHC.

[Stu from NYC]

Originally Posted by Topspinmo

Not going to happen when you have representative’s that don’t even read bills. The most famous was we have to pass it to see what’s in it.

And very foolishly we the people keep reelecting them. How sad.

[WelchNH]

I'm on The Villages Health Plan (Medicare Advantage plan run by United Healthcare). I also take Eliquis and my quarterly co-pay is $125. I agree that Medicare should be authorized to negotiate drug prices- the USA is the only advanced country where the government is not authorized to negotiate prices. This occurred because of the 2004 plan for senior drug coverage under Medicare
.

[TSO/ISPF]

Originally Posted by WelchNH

I'm on The Villages Health Plan (Medicare Advantage plan run by United Healthcare). I also take Eliquis and my quarterly co-pay is $125. I agree that Medicare should be authorized to negotiate drug prices- the USA is the only advanced country where the government is not authorized to negotiate prices. This occurred because of the 2004 plan for senior drug coverage under Medicare
.

that's what I was paying until I hit the donut hole. Now it's close to 400.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Just as an FYI, which I already mentioned and now confirmed - you can request a co-pay card from BMS/Pfizer. Savings And Support Info | ELIQUIS(R) (apixaban) | Safety Info

You can also get a "free trial offer" which gives you your first prescription absolutely free (they might let you have one refill free if you're already taking it, I didn't dig any deeper than that.


Paying $125 every 3 months for Eloquis is actually pretty amazing, considering that for people who have NO insurance, it is over $600 for a 30-day supply ($1800 per quarter), and with GoodRx discount you can get it for around $500 per month.

Looks to me like someone is getting a pretty amazing price on this ridiculously-priced anticoagulant. You could always go back to coumadin/warfarin, which you can get at Walmart for $6/month. What in the world did people DO before Eloquis was invented? They took something else, and paid less for it. That's what they did.

Eloquis only came out in the last couple of years, there's no generic for it yet. Once there is, they'll lower the price. Or you can just get the cheaper generic.

I had to go through the same thing when I first started taking Ambien, though my cost was still not that astronomical. But my insurance plan didn't cover it at all because it only covered generics at the time. Now that it's available in generic, I only have to pay around $13 for a 90-day prescription at Publix. And that's without any insurance at all, just normal GoodRx.

If I wanted to use the brand name Ambien instead of the generic zolpidem, it'd set me back $1700 and change for a 90-day supply - WITH GoodRX. Insurance I believe won't cover it at all.

[TSO/ISPF]

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby

Just as an FYI, which I already mentioned and now confirmed - you can request a co-pay card from BMS/Pfizer. Savings And Support Info | ELIQUIS(R) (apixaban) | Safety Info


You can also get a "free trial offer" which gives you your first prescription absolutely free (they might let you have one refill free if you're already taking it, I didn't dig any deeper than that.


Paying $125 every 3 months for Eloquis is actually pretty amazing, considering that for people who have NO insurance, it is over $600 for a 30-day supply ($1800 per quarter), and with GoodRx discount you can get it for around $500 per month.

Looks to me like someone is getting a pretty amazing price on this ridiculously-priced anticoagulant. You could always go back to coumadin/warfarin, which you can get at Walmart for $6/month. What in the world did people DO before Eloquis was invented? They took something else, and paid less for it. That's what they did.

Eloquis only came out in the last couple of years, there's no generic for it yet. Once there is, they'll lower the price. Or you can just get the cheaper generic.

I had to go through the same thing when I first started taking Ambien, though my cost was still not that astronomical. But my insurance plan didn't cover it at all because it only covered generics at the time. Now that it's available in generic, I only have to pay around $13 for a 90-day prescription at Publix. And that's without any insurance at all, just normal GoodRx.

If I wanted to use the brand name Ambien instead of the generic zolpidem, it'd set me back $1700 and change for a 90-day supply - WITH GoodRX. Insurance I believe won't cover it at all.

Getting the help requires you have few assets.
Warafin is a real pain to take and is not as affective for stroke prevention.
There is a generic for it. BUTT:
"When will generic Eliquis be available?
It’s not clear. The FDA has approved applications from drug makers Micro Labs Limited and Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. to produce generic Eliquis. But the maker of brand-name Eliquis, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and its partner, Pfizer, are fighting to prevent generic versions from getting to market for several more years. As the original manufacturers, they own a patent that prevents generics from being introduced until the patent expires. That patent was extended from February 2023 to November 2026. Both drug makers say that’s when generics can be made available." This is from a Goodrx Website.

Anyway, Eliquis is just an example I am familiar with. I am certain there are many other drugs that are
ridiculously priced, like Humira for RA.

[jayjayson]

Since big pharma makes money selling overpriced products. Since they are profit motivated do you really believe they will stop selling to Medicare providers since they will make less money, spoiler alter they won't.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Originally Posted by heims01

Getting the help requires you have few assets.
Warafin is a real pain to take and is not as affective for stroke prevention.
There is a generic for it. BUTT:
"When will generic Eliquis be available?
It’s not clear. The FDA has approved applications from drug makers Micro Labs Limited and Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. to produce generic Eliquis. But the maker of brand-name Eliquis, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and its partner, Pfizer, are fighting to prevent generic versions from getting to market for several more years. As the original manufacturers, they own a patent that prevents generics from being introduced until the patent expires. That patent was extended from February 2023 to November 2026. Both drug makers say that’s when generics can be made available." This is from a Goodrx Website.

Anyway, Eliquis is just an example I am familiar with. I am certain there are many other drugs that are
ridiculously priced, like Humira for RA.

Your assets or lack thereof has nothing to do with getting a $10 co-pay card from Bristol-Meyers for Eloquis. Anyone whose Rx coverage doesn't already cover the full amount, is not receiving Medicare Part D, is over 18, can get the card. You just have to fill out the form online.

As I said - many pharmaceutical companies will discount their expensive meds with a request. I got my Chantix for something like $10 when I decided to quit smoking back when I was 40, and Chantix was still new to the market. My first week's worth was free, as a "starter sample" from the doctor.

All I had to do was submit the request. I -did- have health coverage and prescription coverage at the time but because there was no generic and it was BRAND NEW to the market, my cost would've been around $90 per month for a 3-month Rx. I got 2 months worth for $12, quit smoking my second week, and tossed the rest away.

My beef with Medicare or any other singular program negotiating prices, is that everyone who isn't eligible for those programs ends up paying more to make up for it. And - MOST people aren't on Medicare. So MOST people will end up paying more, just so people over age 65 get a break. The cost for people who have no insurance at all would be astronomical, if you think $600/month is expensive. Imagine how much they'll have to pay if your cost is reduced, just because of your age.

Age discrimination goes both ways. I, who am not yet eligible for Medicare, should not have to pay more just so you can pay less. The negotiated prices should cover ALL citizens in this country who need the meds. Not just one demographic to the exclusion of all else.

[TSO/ISPF]

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby

Your assets or lack thereof has nothing to do with getting a $10 co-pay card from Bristol-Meyers for Eloquis. Anyone whose Rx coverage doesn't already cover the full amount, is not receiving Medicare Part D, is over 18, can get the card. You just have to fill out the form online.

As I said - many pharmaceutical companies will discount their expensive meds with a request. I got my Chantix for something like $10 when I decided to quit smoking back when I was 40, and Chantix was still new to the market. My first week's worth was free, as a "starter sample" from the doctor.

All I had to do was submit the request. I -did- have health coverage and prescription coverage at the time but because there was no generic and it was BRAND NEW to the market, my cost would've been around $90 per month for a 3-month Rx. I got 2 months worth for $12, quit smoking my second week, and tossed the rest away.

My beef with Medicare or any other singular program negotiating prices, is that everyone who isn't eligible for those programs ends up paying more to make up for it. And - MOST people aren't on Medicare. So MOST people will end up paying more, just so people over age 65 get a break. The cost for people who have no insurance at all would be astronomical, if you think $600/month is expensive. Imagine how much they'll have to pay if your cost is reduced, just because of your age.

Age discrimination goes both ways. I, who am not yet eligible for Medicare, should not have to pay more just so you can pay less. The negotiated prices should cover ALL citizens in this country who need the meds. Not just one demographic to the exclusion of all else.

So we should just continue to subsidize the rest of the world so big Pharma companies can rake in millions of profits every day, week, month, quarter, year??? This post was about Medicare and the costs we pay. What these companies are making on these drugs is another question but also one that would be good to have real answers to. Corporate America is great at making those answers hard to find.

[TSO/ISPF]

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby

Your assets or lack thereof has nothing to do with getting a $10 co-pay card from Bristol-Meyers for Eloquis. Anyone whose Rx coverage doesn't already cover the full amount, is not receiving Medicare Part D, is over 18, can get the card. You just have to fill out the form online.

As I said - many pharmaceutical companies will discount their expensive meds with a request. I got my Chantix for something like $10 when I decided to quit smoking back when I was 40, and Chantix was still new to the market. My first week's worth was free, as a "starter sample" from the doctor.

All I had to do was submit the request. I -did- have health coverage and prescription coverage at the time but because there was no generic and it was BRAND NEW to the market, my cost would've been around $90 per month for a 3-month Rx. I got 2 months worth for $12, quit smoking my second week, and tossed the rest away.

My beef with Medicare or any other singular program negotiating prices, is that everyone who isn't eligible for those programs ends up paying more to make up for it. And - MOST people aren't on Medicare. So MOST people will end up paying more, just so people over age 65 get a break. The cost for people who have no insurance at all would be astronomical, if you think $600/month is expensive. Imagine how much they'll have to pay if your cost is reduced, just because of your age.

Age discrimination goes both ways. I, who am not yet eligible for Medicare, should not have to pay more just so you can pay less. The negotiated prices should cover ALL citizens in this country who need the meds. Not just one demographic to the exclusion of all else.

When I had commercial insurance my copay was 30 dollars. I can't recall what the insurance company actually paid but it wasn't 1800 for a 90 day supply. Volume discounts are a normal course for businesses and Medicare is one big business. Let them negotiate better prices from Big Pharma. Don't let them advertise to the general public and they'll save a lot of the "cost" of these drugs for them.

[Cindyd]

I think it’s a really complex issue. I believe the negation would include prices for VA, military, Medicare, Medicaid, all fed healthcare programs, and if The US is the drugs only market, highly unlikely, prices would have to go up for Americans not on any of above program.

What Trump was trying to do was get US on same pricing scale as other developed countries. For example I’m prescribed a ointment that cost $360 per tube if I go through my Medicare RX program. If I buy online from a Canadian pharmacy it costs me $40.

In the past Big Pharma has said that lowering prices would impact new product development, which makes sense. But, if all countries were put on same price, all contributed based on per capita to award research grants through org such as WHO or NIH, it would work…the grant part obviously needs lots of controls.

I also think we need to get drug mfg out of China, which depending on where mfg occurs, would impact costs.

Now, having said that, It will never happen as big pharma equals big political donors

[TSO/ISPF]

[QUOTE=Cindyd;2003077]I think it’s a really complex issue. I believe the negation would include prices for VA, military, Medicare, Medicaid, all fed healthcare programs, and if The US is the drugs only market, highly unlikely, prices would have to go up for Americans not on any of above program.

The VA already has better prices for the veterans they insure. Not all vets qualify for that insurance though. United Health Care should be able to reduce costs for people who have their Part D supplemental coverage but when you reach the donut hole which is 4130 for total cost of your prescriptions, your copays go up substantially(25% of the total cost) until you reach 6550 in total costs for your prescriptions. I pay
82 a month premium for my part D supplemental and my out of pocket this year will be over 2k. I guess the fact that I am on Medicare means even UHC can't get a better price than "retail".

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Originally Posted by heims01

So we should just continue to subsidize the rest of the world so big Pharma companies can rake in millions of profits every day, week, month, quarter, year??? This post was about Medicare and the costs we pay. What these companies are making on these drugs is another question but also one that would be good to have real answers to. Corporate America is great at making those answers hard to find.

Why are you talking about subsidizing the world when my response to you had nothing to do with subsidizing the rest of the world? Why do you keep changing the topic in response to my responses to your posts?

The thread is about whether or not people feel Medicare should negotiate for better drug prices. My response to that question is no. My response to that question is:

Medicare is a government program. The government should not be negotiating prices for ONE segment of the population based on their age. ONLY people age 65 or older are eligible for Medicare, therefore ONLY people 65 or older would be eligible for better prices if the government only negotiated better prices for people with Medicare coverage.

If the government is going to negotiate for better prices, they should negotiate for better prices for the entire country - not JUST people age 65 or older who have chosen Medicare coverage for prescriptions.