. By the due date indicated, create a post addressing the following questions: a. Would government-regulated pricing of drugs increase or decrease research and development in drug treatments? b. Who would benefit the most if the government were to regulate pricing? c. Who would benefit the least if the government were to regulate pricing? d. What would be a fair pricing structure for new drugs so that companies could reasonably "make up\" the millions they spent on creating them? . By midnight (Eastern Time) Sunday, respond to at least two of your classmates' ariginal posts, addressing the following: a. Do you agree or disagree with their analysis? State your reasons why or why not. b. Would you add anything to their ideas about a fair pricing structure? c. Did they mention any impacts that you had not thought of and does that change your mind? | \\ Julie Morgan I Tuesday | feel government-regulated pricing of drugs would decrease research and development of new drug treatments. It is very costly and takes a lot of time for a drug to be FDA approved. Decreased prices would cause issues for the drug companies as far as getting drugs approved in a reasonable amount of time. However, this is a "double edged sword" in the sense that government-regulated pricing would indeed benefit patients with being able to afford the drugs that they need. | feel more times than not, a patient goes without medication or is on medication that is not properly managing their disease due to cost. Even with insurance, many medications cost more than what a typical patient can afford. Personally, | feel the biggest issue is insurance companies somewhat dictating what a doctor should prescribe. They don't want to pay top dollar for a specific medication when there is another that is similar or generic. | feel they need to have trust in the prescribing doctors and cover what is ordered without having to jump through hoops as far as prior authorizations or the "try this medication first" approach. To be more fair to all parties involved, drug companies should have a stricter budget and guidelines when creating a new drug. If it is not in the budget, it needs to wait. Chances are patients will not be able to afford it and insurances companies won't want to pay for it. Drug companies need to be more considerate of the audience they are targeting. So many prescriptions offer coupons or discounts for patients that cannot afford them. This is great, but why can't the price be the same across the board for everyone? Grocery and department stores do not offer different prices depending on income, so why should prescription drugs be any different? Tyreal Love Wednesday A. | believe that research and development of treatments would increase, if the pricing of drugs were government regulated. In this week's text, cost and net effectiveness was explained; And after learning about those terms, it would depend on if treatment was described as net effectiveness, or successful in treatment. If the drug is more expensive, the net effectiveness should also increase. The more research, higher the chance the drug price will increase. b/c. | combined both answers, because not sure if government regulating drug prices would be good or bad, or if it would be a low/high price. | feel that information is vital to determine who would benefit or not. If the prices were higher I'm sure that would benefit the Pharma industry, same with the government due to the profit they will gain from increasing prices. Seniors or any medicare/medicaid insurance holders would benefit the least, financially and maybe decrease the drugs available for them as well. d. Fair pricing structure would depend a lot on the brands pushing out the drugs. They're name brand drugs and generic drugs. Both has the same ingredients/ route of administration, etc. But generic drugs are cheaper. The name of the drug is what consumers are paying for majority rather than the drug it self. Reply /1