Welp, once again that eeeevil retailer Wal-Mart demonstrates how falling prices help those that can afford it the least. Similarly, it demonstrates how medicines, as bulk consumer items, could be cheaper than many other cheap everyday items that the poor buy regularly.

Driving costs down, whether it be in electronics, foodstuffs, energy, or, in this case medicine, HELPS those that can afford it the least. Taxing them to death, so that it becomes hard to afford ANYTHING, destroys them. Get it folks?

From CNN:

Wal-Mart expands low-priced drug program

The world's biggest retailer offers 90-day prescriptions for $10 and more than 1,000 OTC drugs for $4 or less.
Last Updated: May 5, 2008: 1:53 PM EDT

LITTLE ROCK, Ark. (AP) -- Wal-Mart Stores Inc., the world's largest retailer, announced Monday it would expand its discounted prescription drug program to offer 90-day supplies for $10 and add several women's medications at a discount. It also said it would lower the price of more than 1,000 over-the-counter drugs.

The move marks the third phase of a company program that began in 2006 to provide a 30-day supply of generic prescription drugs for $4. The Bentonville-based company said the program has saved customers more than $1 billion.

With the expansion, the company began filling prescriptions Monday for up to 350 generic medications at $10 for a 90-day supply at Wal-Mart, Neighborhood Market and Sam's Club pharmacies in the United States. Almost all the prescription generics in the company's $4 program were included in the expanded $10 offer, said Wal-Mart senior vice president John Agwunobi.

In addition, the company will add several women's medications to its list of prescriptions available for $9, including drugs to treat breast cancer and hormone deficiency.

For instance, alendronate, the generic version of osteoporosis medication Fosamax, will be added to the list. Company pharmacies will fill 30-day prescriptions of alendronate for $9 and a 90-day supply for $24 at a comparison of $54 and $102, respectively, that women previously paid for the same amounts, the company said.

Tamoxifen, used to treat breast cancer, will be offered for $9 for a 30-day supply, as well as combination estrogen/methyltestosterone tablets, prescribed for menopause and hormone deficiency.

Wal-Mart also will lower the prices of more than 1,000 over-the-counter medications to $4 or less in its pharmacies, company officials said. The company has sold over-the-counter medicines in the past at discounted prices, but revised and expanded its offerings specifically to include commonly used drugs that usually sell for $7 or more, said company spokesman Deisha Galberth.

The over-the-counter medication price rollbacks represent about one-third of the retailer's over-the-counter medicines. They include Wal-Mart's Equate versions of popular drugs, including Zantac, Pepcid and Claritin, and Wal-Mart's Spring Valley prenatal vitamins.

Since 2006, Wal-Mart's $4 generic drug program has expanded to every state, except North Dakota, where Wal-Mart has no in-store pharmacies. And many company competitors have followed the retailer's lead.

While stressing that the expansion was designed to help customers at a time of exorbitant health-care costs and difficult economic times, Agwunobi said the program has worked in everyone's favor.

"This is the time for us now to begin building capacity," he said. "It offers [customers'] employers potential savings. It offers the customers significant savings. It also offers us the ability to add capacity to our pharmacies without adding people."

Agwunobi expects the 90-day discount will increase the company's market share of mail-order and online prescriptions as customers realize the value of the company offer.

Wal-Mart Chief Operating Officer Bill Simon said the results in each phase of the program have been strong and prescription volume has increased, "exceeding our expectations." He said the company would not, however, offer free generic drugs at its in-store clinics as some competitors have.

"We're in business to make money," Simon said. "Free is a price that is not a long-term sustainable proposition."

Shares of Wal-Mart (WMT, Fortune 500) fell 44 cents to $57.06 in afternoon trading Monday. To top of page
First Published: May 5, 2008: 7:41 AM EDT

---

Cordially,
Rush

elrushbo2@theobviousgmail.com
Remove the obvious...

Now ya gotta wonder.....

How is it that Wal Mart can afford to sell that many prescriptions for between 4 and 10 dollars ( albeit generic versions of the drugs ) but the pharmaceutical companies want you to pay a LOT more for basically the same level of effectiveness....and no one in government bats an eye about it?

* edit * OH!!! What about the fact that a couple of years ago....President Bush hammered away at the American people about how " eeeeeevvvviiiilllll " it was to order prescription drugs from Canada ( for fear of getting lower quality drugs ) and yet...the Detroit Free Press had a story recently about how the big pharmaceutical companies are allowed to import the drugs they sell ( at VERY high prices ) from China and Mexico.

Does that sound somewhat crooked to anyone else, or am I the only one??

---

Air Cold, the blade stops;
from silent stone,
Death is preordained

Calm Chaos Forums : Everyone Welcome

Now ya gotta wonder.....

How is it that Wal Mart can afford to sell that many prescriptions for between 4 and 10 dollars ( albeit generic versions of the drugs ) but the pharmaceutical companies want you to pay a LOT more for basically the same level of effectiveness....and no one in government bats an eye about it?

* edit * OH!!! What about the fact that a couple of years ago....President Bush hammered away at the American people about how " eeeeeevvvviiiilllll " it was to order prescription drugs from Canada ( for fear of getting lower quality drugs ) and yet...the Detroit Free Press had a story recently about how the big pharmaceutical companies are allowed to import the drugs they sell ( at VERY high prices ) from China and Mexico.

Does that sound somewhat crooked to anyone else, or am I the only one??

Or the FTA between the US and Aus. Something about the big pharm wanting the PBS reduced/removed and a change to patent laws (to stop something they called evergreening) I think...

---

Never surrender and never give up. In the darkest hour there is always hope.

Now ya gotta wonder.....

How is it that Wal Mart can afford to sell that many prescriptions for between 4 and 10 dollars ( albeit generic versions of the drugs ) but the pharmaceutical companies want you to pay a LOT more for basically the same level of effectiveness....and no one in government bats an eye about it?

* edit * OH!!! What about the fact that a couple of years ago....President Bush hammered away at the American people about how " eeeeeevvvviiiilllll " it was to order prescription drugs from Canada ( for fear of getting lower quality drugs ) and yet...the Detroit Free Press had a story recently about how the big pharmaceutical companies are allowed to import the drugs they sell ( at VERY high prices ) from China and Mexico.

Does that sound somewhat crooked to anyone else, or am I the only one??

Well, I seriously doubt he called the practice "evil" even though it does undermine American business, but I really don't see anything wrong with telling people that medicine purchased in foreign countries has not been subjected to FDA quality standards.

Can you find me a link for that story? I'm running a little late this morning :(

---

Now ya gotta wonder.....

How is it that Wal Mart can afford to sell that many prescriptions for between 4 and 10 dollars ( albeit generic versions of the drugs ) but the pharmaceutical companies want you to pay a LOT more for basically the same level of effectiveness....and no one in government bats an eye about it?

A) Why would you want more gov't meddling, in addition to the gov't meddling that has caused the situation in the first place.

B) Bigpharms are just like any other company--they sell their product at the price they think that they can get. For example, you can get a brand new car at the dealer, or, you can get the same car that is one week old from the classified ads. Fundamental difference = nothing. Price difference = substantial, yet dealers still sell new cars.

You can always ask for generic drugs if you wish them--but many of those companies do quite well on the perception that generic in drugs is somehow lesser.

But the point still remains: Driving costs down, whether it be in electronics, foodstuffs, energy, or, in this case medicine, HELPS those that can afford it the least. Taxing them to death, or doing anything possible to drive costs up for them, so that it becomes hard to afford ANYTHING, destroys them.

Get it folks? I really don't know why that is so hard for some of you.

---

Cordially,
Rush

elrushbo2@theobviousgmail.com
Remove the obvious...

Now ya gotta wonder.....

How is it that Wal Mart can afford to sell that many prescriptions for between 4 and 10 dollars ( albeit generic versions of the drugs ) but the pharmaceutical companies want you to pay a LOT more for basically the same level of effectiveness....and no one in government bats an eye about it?

A) Why would you want more gov't meddling, in addition to the gov't meddling that has caused the situation in the first place.

B) Bigpharms are just like any other company--they sell their product at the price they think that they can get. For example, you can get a brand new car at the dealer, or, you can get the same car that is one week old from the classified ads. Fundamental difference = nothing. Price difference = substantial, yet dealers still sell new cars.

You can always ask for generic drugs if you wish them--but many of those companies do quite well on the perception that generic in drugs is somehow lesser.

But the point still remains: Driving costs down, whether it be in electronics, foodstuffs, energy, or, in this case medicine, HELPS those that can afford it the least. Taxing them to death, or doing anything possible to drive costs up for them, so that it becomes hard to afford ANYTHING, destroys them.

Get it folks? I really don't know why that is so hard for some of you.

Rush, I wasn't necessarily asking for more government interference in this case. I guess my point was more along the line of " they tell us that buying drugs from Canada is wrong, but yet it's ok for the bigpharms to import [i]their[/]i] products from Mexico and China ".

My question would be, why is it ok for the bigpharms to do it, but not ok for us to search out other sources for prescriptions?

---

Air Cold, the blade stops;
from silent stone,
Death is preordained

Calm Chaos Forums : Everyone Welcome

Now ya gotta wonder.....

How is it that Wal Mart can afford to sell that many prescriptions for between 4 and 10 dollars ( albeit generic versions of the drugs ) but the pharmaceutical companies want you to pay a LOT more for basically the same level of effectiveness....and no one in government bats an eye about it?

* edit * OH!!! What about the fact that a couple of years ago....President Bush hammered away at the American people about how " eeeeeevvvviiiilllll " it was to order prescription drugs from Canada ( for fear of getting lower quality drugs ) and yet...the Detroit Free Press had a story recently about how the big pharmaceutical companies are allowed to import the drugs they sell ( at VERY high prices ) from China and Mexico.

Does that sound somewhat crooked to anyone else, or am I the only one??

Well, I seriously doubt he called the practice "evil" even though it does undermine American business, but I really don't see anything wrong with telling people that medicine purchased in foreign countries has not been subjected to FDA quality standards.

Can you find me a link for that story? I'm running a little late this morning :(

I can't seem to find the story in the online Free Press Archives. Sorry.

Question though. Who says that the " bigpharms " ( as Rush put it ) are importing drigs that have been FDA approved?

---

Air Cold, the blade stops;
from silent stone,
Death is preordained

Calm Chaos Forums : Everyone Welcome

Rush, I wasn't necessarily asking for more government interference in this case. I guess my point was more along the line of " they tell us that buying drugs from Canada is wrong, but yet it's ok for the bigpharms to import [i]their[/]i] products from Mexico and China ".

My question would be, why is it ok for the bigpharms to do it, but not ok for us to search out other sources for prescriptions?

Because the gov't said so. That's it.

Just as you (not you personally) have the right to lobby the gov't to force your half-baked idea onto other people that would not otherwise choose do what you would have them do, those people have the right to lobby the gov't to prevent you from using common sense: re-importing drugs from reputable sources at a significant savings. It doesn't matter that either position is right or wrong, just that they can get the gov't to force it onto others.

Additionally, the countries that provide socialized medicine lobby the U.S. gov't heavily to prevent American citizens from doing so. The argument is that since x proportion of the American standard of living is financed on the backs of people around the world (as the American dollar is the de facto world currency and the reserve currency of many countries) that Americans should just suck it up and eat the higher prices.

Those countries know full well that the second Americans can reimport cheap drugs, the bigpharms will cease giving the USSK or Canada or anywhere else the significant discount they get because the bigpharms know they can make up the difference charging Americans higher prices.

While that would mean that costs for drugs for Americans would drop somewhat, the corresponding increase for the socialized countries would significantly impact their ability to provide care. And as usual, that would mean that they would have to cut services and ration care even further.

Dat ain't gud fer politicians who buy votes on the promise that "someone else" will be paying for it, or that it's "free." Heh.

---

Cordially,
Rush

elrushbo2@theobviousgmail.com
Remove the obvious...

Question though. Who says that the " bigpharms " ( as Rush put it ) are importing drigs that have been FDA approved?

I would bet that they are just "importing" their own product that was produced somewhere else, i.e. BMW ships the X5s from Spartanburg to Germany or the rest of the world. They aren't really "importing" the cars from somewhere else in that sense. Or the middlemen (CVS, Walgreens, distributors, et cetera) are just buying drugs under contract with SmithKline or whoever, that just get shipped from wherever is most convenient.

---

Cordially,
Rush

elrushbo2@theobviousgmail.com
Remove the obvious...

Rush, I wasn't necessarily asking for more government interference in this case. I guess my point was more along the line of " they tell us that buying drugs from Canada is wrong, but yet it's ok for the bigpharms to import [i]their[/]i] products from Mexico and China ".

My question would be, why is it ok for the bigpharms to do it, but not ok for us to search out other sources for prescriptions?

Because the gov't said so. That's it.

Just as you (not you personally) have the right to lobby the gov't to force your half-baked idea onto other people that would not otherwise choose do what you would have them do, those people have the right to lobby the gov't to prevent you from using common sense: re-importing drugs from reputable sources at a significant savings. It doesn't matter that either position is right or wrong, just that they can get the gov't to force it onto others.

Additionally, the countries that provide socialized medicine lobby the U.S. gov't heavily to prevent American citizens from doing so. The argument is that since x proportion of the American standard of living is financed on the backs of people around the world (as the American dollar is the de facto world currency and the reserve currency of many countries) that Americans should just suck it up and eat the higher prices.

Those countries know full well that the second Americans can reimport cheap drugs, the bigpharms will cease giving the USSK or Canada or anywhere else the significant discount they get because the bigpharms know they can make up the difference charging Americans higher prices.

While that would mean that costs for drugs for Americans would drop somewhat, the corresponding increase for the socialized countries would significantly impact their ability to provide care. And as usual, that would mean that they would have to cut services and ration care even further.

Dat ain't gud fer politicians who buy votes on the promise that "someone else" will be paying for it, or that it's "free." Heh.

Ok....I understand what you are saying, but aren't we basically dealing with " socialized " medicine at this point anyway?? The government says we can't order prescription drugs from anywhere else. We can choose generic drugs, but in some cases, even those are still more expensive than non imported drugs.

A rose by any other name...?

---

Air Cold, the blade stops;
from silent stone,
Death is preordained

Calm Chaos Forums : Everyone Welcome

Question though. Who says that the " bigpharms " ( as Rush put it ) are importing drigs that have been FDA approved?

I would bet that they are just "importing" their own product that was produced somewhere else, i.e. BMW ships the X5s from Spartanburg to Germany or the rest of the world. They aren't really "importing" the cars from somewhere else in that sense. Or the middlemen (CVS, Walgreens, distributors, et cetera) are just buying drugs under contract with SmithKline or whoever, that just get shipped from wherever is most convenient.

Fair enough, and that's probably the case.

I'm just whistling in the wind at this point anyway...lol

---

Air Cold, the blade stops;
from silent stone,
Death is preordained

Calm Chaos Forums : Everyone Welcome

Ok....I understand what you are saying, but aren't we basically dealing with " socialized " medicine at this point anyway?? The government says we can't order prescription drugs from anywhere else. We can choose generic drugs, but in some cases, even those are still more expensive than non imported drugs.

A rose by any other name...?

Well, yes, but not as the term is commonly used or understood. "socialized medicine" generally refers to the countries that provide it without charging for it at the point of use. They charge, of course, in the enormous tax burden that drives the costs of everything up. The citizens pay every dime, not big corporations, not employers, not unions, not the rich, not any other entity that the gov't can come up with to hoodwink fools that love to believe that "someone else" pays for it.

The U.S. system is socialized in the context that there is massive and intrusive gov't regulation that, as always, drives costs up. That, the distancing of the end user from the costs, and a perception similar to that of other countries that "someone else" is paying for it (the employer, the insurance company, the gov't, et cetera) results in the mess we have now. Some of the best care in the world, certainly nearly the most productive and innovative, but a huge socialized pain.

The reason I posted the first post was to illustrate that medicines and most medical related items are bulk items, generally produced very very cheaply. They can be far cheaper than everyday household items that the poor buy every day. Barring, of course, all the gov't meddling...

---

Cordially,
Rush

elrushbo2@theobviousgmail.com
Remove the obvious...

The government(s) oughta put the brakes on brand-name drug advertising. One evening while I was washing the dishes during the national news I heard a three-minute - that's right- three minute ad about (I think it was but I don't care what it was) Celebrex. That's atrocious.

---

Now ya gotta wonder.....

How is it that Wal Mart can afford to sell that many prescriptions for between 4 and 10 dollars ( albeit generic versions of the drugs ) but the pharmaceutical companies want you to pay a LOT more for basically the same level of effectiveness....and no one in government bats an eye about it?

* edit * OH!!! What about the fact that a couple of years ago....President Bush hammered away at the American people about how " eeeeeevvvviiiilllll " it was to order prescription drugs from Canada ( for fear of getting lower quality drugs ) and yet...the Detroit Free Press had a story recently about how the big pharmaceutical companies are allowed to import the drugs they sell ( at VERY high prices ) from China and Mexico.

Does that sound somewhat crooked to anyone else, or am I the only one??

Well, I seriously doubt he called the practice "evil" even though it does undermine American business, but I really don't see anything wrong with telling people that medicine purchased in foreign countries has not been subjected to FDA quality standards.

Can you find me a link for that story? I'm running a little late this morning :(

I can't seem to find the story in the online Free Press Archives. Sorry.

Question though. Who says that the " bigpharms " ( as Rush put it ) are importing drigs that have been FDA approved?

Well that's exactly why I wanted to read the story for myself...to see if there are some type of regulations or quality control parameters in effect.

---

during the national news I heard a three-minute - that's right- three minute ad about (I think it was but I don't care what it was) Celebrex. That's atrocious.

Ever wonder why the most 'atrocious' commercials seem to be the ones that can afford the most airtime? ;)

---

It may not be 1984 but George Orwell sure did see the future . . .

The government(s) oughta put the brakes on brand-name drug advertising. One evening while I was washing the dishes during the national news I heard a three-minute - that's right- three minute ad about (I think it was but I don't care what it was) Celebrex. That's atrocious.

They are, in essence, required to by law.

They cannot just make their claims and then say, "talk to your doctor," in a normal 15 or 30 second spot. The gov't requires that they drone on about possible side effects which people generally ignore, just as they generally ignore the full page fact sheet following print ads.

---

Cordially,
Rush

elrushbo2@theobviousgmail.com
Remove the obvious...

The government(s) oughta put the brakes on brand-name drug advertising. One evening while I was washing the dishes during the national news I heard a three-minute - that's right- three minute ad about (I think it was but I don't care what it was) Celebrex. That's atrocious.

They are, in essence, required to by law.

They cannot just make their claims and then say, "talk to your doctor," in a normal 15 or 30 second spot. The gov't requires that they drone on about possible side effects which people generally ignore, just as they generally ignore the full page fact sheet following print ads.

Have you ever been given medication by your local GP and read the 'fact sheet' that comes with it? In one case the list of side-effects was the largest section on the fold out sheet. So it might stop one thing happening, but you may suffer from a dozen or more side-effects. In my case, when I had glandular fever, took one tablet and within 20 minutes I was revisiting what was in my stomach. But prior to taking the tablet I was mostly fine. And the doc wanted me to take three a day while waiting for blood test results (as we didn't know what I had at the time and the blood tests confirmed what I was suffering)...

So reading side-effects can be somewhat scary and you could be thinking, "Do I want to take this?"...

---

Never surrender and never give up. In the darkest hour there is always hope.

I will first admit that I do not know a whole lot about the subject. Now having said that, one of the things I do know is that part of the reason that many drugs are so expensive here in the states is that our government allows the pharm companies to recoup their research and testing costs when a drug is approved by the FDA and released for consumers. I do not remember the exact amount of time, but they are allowed to charge much higher than normal prices for a certain number of years in order to recoup their costs. Now as far as I know this remains true even if the drugs are actually manufactured in another country where costs are much cheaper.

EDIT: Yeah, I got it partially wrong. They have a lot of tax breaks and other protections to help them recoup R&D and approval costs. You can read about it here http://www.law.berkeley.edu/library/classes/alr/pathfinerexample2/CostFactors.html

The government(s) oughta put the brakes on brand-name drug advertising. One evening while I was washing the dishes during the national news I heard a three-minute - that's right- three minute ad about (I think it was but I don't care what it was) Celebrex. That's atrocious.

They are, in essence, required to by law.

They cannot just make their claims and then say, "talk to your doctor," in a normal 15 or 30 second spot. The gov't requires that they drone on about possible side effects which people generally ignore, just as they generally ignore the full page fact sheet following print ads.

Why do they NEED to advertise at all? If it's the right medication, the doctor should know about it and prescribe it.

The whole concept about getting the clueless public jazzed about the latest hot new drug so they will rush to their doctor and demand it is just mind-numbingly idiotic and should be outlawed.

---

The government(s) oughta put the brakes on brand-name drug advertising. One evening while I was washing the dishes during the national news I heard a three-minute - that's right- three minute ad about (I think it was but I don't care what it was) Celebrex. That's atrocious.

They are, in essence, required to by law.

They cannot just make their claims and then say, "talk to your doctor," in a normal 15 or 30 second spot. The gov't requires that they drone on about possible side effects which people generally ignore, just as they generally ignore the full page fact sheet following print ads.

Why do they NEED to advertise at all? If it's the right medication, the doctor should know about it and prescribe it.

The whole concept about getting the clueless public jazzed about the latest hot new drug so they will rush to their doctor and demand it is just mind-numbingly idiotic and should be outlawed.

They "need" to advertise for the same reason every other company trying to sell a product "needs" to advertise...competition.

---