I do not know what will solve it, but maybe the ideas of a redistributional managerial state or price controls might seem attractive.
With the new pricing system, insurers abandoned the traditional arrangement that has patients pay a fixed amount, like $10, $20 or $30 for a prescription, no matter what the drug’s actual cost. Instead, they are charging patients a percentage of the cost of certain high-priced drugs, usually 20 to 33 percent, which can amount to thousands of dollars a month.
The system means that the burden of expensive health care can now affect insured people, too.
No one knows how many patients are affected, but hundreds of drugs are priced this new way. They are used to treat diseases that may be fairly common, including multiple sclerosis, rheumatoid arthritis, hemophilia, hepatitis C and some cancers. There are no cheaper equivalents for these drugs, so patients are forced to pay the price or do without.
Insurers say the new system keeps everyone’s premiums down at a time when some of the most innovative and promising new treatments for conditions like cancer and rheumatoid arthritis and multiple sclerosis can cost $100,000 and more a year.
I remember a scene in* Sicko *where a patient was denied the experimental drug Avastin (bevacizumab) for renal cell carcinoma. It was the most lachrymose scene in the entire documentary and an effective piece of propaganda. However, the drugs here are not experimental so they do not have questionable utility. Well, I guess rationing on the ability to pay will be the rationing in the future American system.
Well, I guess having chronic myelogenous leukemia and not having anyone pay for dasatinib (Sprycel) must be inconvienent.