Dear EpiPen Customers . . .
 

On 8/31/16 1:15 PM, Califbill wrote:
wrote:
On Wed, 31 Aug 2016 12:12:09 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

I suggest you read for content and get back to us.

I read the "Canada" part and my first thought is I bet Canada might
ban exports to the US if this passes because it would make their
prices go up if they didn't. Their negotiations with the drug
companies will change if the companies realize this is not just the
small Canadian market but the much larger US market.
I don't think it is a secret that the US has always subsidized foreign
sales.


Most foreign countries regulate the price per manufacturing cost plus a
reasonable profit. They do not figure in development costs. Therefore the
USA consumer pays for all development costs.


The current scandal over the epipen price gouging has nothing to do with
development of the product or the cost of the med, which has been
estimated at no more than $1.00. Coincidentally, that is about the same
cost as the current polio vaccine. The original Salk vaccine costs to
the public were kept very low because Jonas Salk was a humanitarian, not
a corporate goniff, and if memory serves, did not patent his medication.
I remember distinctly as a little kid lining up at the local elementary
school, where doctors and nurses had volunteered to inoculate every
schoolkid in New Haven at no cost to parents.

Dear EpiPen Customers . . .
 

On Wed, 31 Aug 2016 13:40:20 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:


The current scandal over the epipen price gouging has nothing to do with
development of the product or the cost of the med, which has been
estimated at no more than $1.00. Coincidentally, that is about the same
cost as the current polio vaccine. The original Salk vaccine costs to
the public were kept very low because Jonas Salk was a humanitarian, not
a corporate goniff, and if memory serves, did not patent his medication.
I remember distinctly as a little kid lining up at the local elementary
school, where doctors and nurses had volunteered to inoculate every
schoolkid in New Haven at no cost to parents.

I agree that this EpiPen deal is highway robbery and if the government
wants to do something, they should streamline the process for someone
to knock this product off but that is cutting back on regulation so
you are automatically against it. The drug itself is generic and dirt
cheap. The patent is in the little bit of plastic that injects it.
This is not rocket science and if FDA would loosen it's grip, any
injection molding shop would be popping them out for a buck or less
each.
It would cost more to certify the shop that loads the drug than the
drug and the injector combined. Knocking off products in any other
industry is common if not the rule. It is not shocking to me that the
medical devices industry is the glaring exception. You only have to
look at the size of the bribes they send legislators here. They have
already sent the politicians over $161 million in this cycle alone
(15% of that to Hillary, by far the largest single benefactor) .
I know you think regulation is the panacea but, as long as the people
who write the regulation, are taking money from the regulated
industries, only the companies who can pony up that kind of money will
be served by that regulation. It is not the consumer who benefits and
it is not the small company that wants to compete. Regulation mainly
benefits the people who can pay to mold that regulation.

Dear EpiPen Customers . . .
 

On 8/31/16 3:05 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 31 Aug 2016 13:40:20 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:


The current scandal over the epipen price gouging has nothing to do with
development of the product or the cost of the med, which has been
estimated at no more than $1.00. Coincidentally, that is about the same
cost as the current polio vaccine. The original Salk vaccine costs to
the public were kept very low because Jonas Salk was a humanitarian, not
a corporate goniff, and if memory serves, did not patent his medication.
I remember distinctly as a little kid lining up at the local elementary
school, where doctors and nurses had volunteered to inoculate every
schoolkid in New Haven at no cost to parents.

I agree that this EpiPen deal is highway robbery and if the government
wants to do something, they should streamline the process for someone
to knock this product off but that is cutting back on regulation so
you are automatically against it. The drug itself is generic and dirt
cheap. The patent is in the little bit of plastic that injects it.
This is not rocket science and if FDA would loosen it's grip, any
injection molding shop would be popping them out for a buck or less
each.
It would cost more to certify the shop that loads the drug than the
drug and the injector combined. Knocking off products in any other
industry is common if not the rule. It is not shocking to me that the
medical devices industry is the glaring exception. You only have to
look at the size of the bribes they send legislators here. They have
already sent the politicians over $161 million in this cycle alone
(15% of that to Hillary, by far the largest single benefactor) .
I know you think regulation is the panacea but, as long as the people
who write the regulation, are taking money from the regulated
industries, only the companies who can pony up that kind of money will
be served by that regulation. It is not the consumer who benefits and
it is not the small company that wants to compete. Regulation mainly
benefits the people who can pay to mold that regulation.


Sorry, but I don't buy your explanation for the epipen ripoff.
Competition isn't going to drive the price down to $10 where it belongs
for a minor drug that was developed decades ago and is dirt cheap to
produce. The cause is simple: corporate greed. I appreciate that a
company that develops a new and important drug is entitled to recover
its costs and make a profit, and that's what the patents provide. But
drug prices are just plain out of control and need reigning in by
whatever means are possible. Charging $300 for a drug that costs at most
$2 or $3 to product, and another $2 to market is insanity. There's more
to life and to a sane society than corporate profits. If the damned pens
cost $5 to make and distribute through the wholesale chain, and they
sold for $25 each, then a case could be made. Beyond that, there is just
plain old greed, and greed is what is destroying this country.

Dear EpiPen Customers . . .
 

On 8/31/2016 3:12 PM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 8/31/16 3:05 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 31 Aug 2016 13:40:20 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:


The current scandal over the epipen price gouging has nothing to do with
development of the product or the cost of the med, which has been
estimated at no more than $1.00. Coincidentally, that is about the same
cost as the current polio vaccine. The original Salk vaccine costs to
the public were kept very low because Jonas Salk was a humanitarian, not
a corporate goniff, and if memory serves, did not patent his medication.
I remember distinctly as a little kid lining up at the local elementary
school, where doctors and nurses had volunteered to inoculate every
schoolkid in New Haven at no cost to parents.

I agree that this EpiPen deal is highway robbery and if the government
wants to do something, they should streamline the process for someone
to knock this product off but that is cutting back on regulation so
you are automatically against it. The drug itself is generic and dirt
cheap. The patent is in the little bit of plastic that injects it.
This is not rocket science and if FDA would loosen it's grip, any
injection molding shop would be popping them out for a buck or less
each.
It would cost more to certify the shop that loads the drug than the
drug and the injector combined. Knocking off products in any other
industry is common if not the rule. It is not shocking to me that the
medical devices industry is the glaring exception. You only have to
look at the size of the bribes they send legislators here. They have
already sent the politicians over $161 million in this cycle alone
(15% of that to Hillary, by far the largest single benefactor) .
I know you think regulation is the panacea but, as long as the people
who write the regulation, are taking money from the regulated
industries, only the companies who can pony up that kind of money will
be served by that regulation. It is not the consumer who benefits and
it is not the small company that wants to compete. Regulation mainly
benefits the people who can pay to mold that regulation.


Sorry, but I don't buy your explanation for the epipen ripoff.
Competition isn't going to drive the price down to $10 where it belongs
for a minor drug that was developed decades ago and is dirt cheap to
produce. The cause is simple: corporate greed. I appreciate that a
company that develops a new and important drug is entitled to recover
its costs and make a profit, and that's what the patents provide. But
drug prices are just plain out of control and need reigning in by
whatever means are possible. Charging $300 for a drug that costs at most
$2 or $3 to product, and another $2 to market is insanity. There's more
to life and to a sane society than corporate profits. If the damned pens
cost $5 to make and distribute through the wholesale chain, and they
sold for $25 each, then a case could be made. Beyond that, there is just
plain old greed, and greed is what is destroying this country.

What does a former jingle writer know about running a successful business?

Dear EpiPen Customers . . .
 

Keyser Soze wrote:
On 8/31/16 1:15 PM, Califbill wrote:
wrote:
On Wed, 31 Aug 2016 12:12:09 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

I suggest you read for content and get back to us.

I read the "Canada" part and my first thought is I bet Canada might
ban exports to the US if this passes because it would make their
prices go up if they didn't. Their negotiations with the drug
companies will change if the companies realize this is not just the
small Canadian market but the much larger US market.
I don't think it is a secret that the US has always subsidized foreign
sales.


Most foreign countries regulate the price per manufacturing cost plus a
reasonable profit. They do not figure in development costs. Therefore the
USA consumer pays for all development costs.


The current scandal over the epipen price gouging has nothing to do with
development of the product or the cost of the med, which has been
estimated at no more than $1.00. Coincidentally, that is about the same
cost as the current polio vaccine. The original Salk vaccine costs to
the public were kept very low because Jonas Salk was a humanitarian, not
a corporate goniff, and if memory serves, did not patent his medication.
I remember distinctly as a little kid lining up at the local elementary
school, where doctors and nurses had volunteered to inoculate every
schoolkid in New Haven at no cost to parents.


Read for content. Part of foreign pricing.

Dear EpiPen Customers . . .
 

Keyser Soze wrote:
On 8/31/16 3:05 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 31 Aug 2016 13:40:20 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:


The current scandal over the epipen price gouging has nothing to do with
development of the product or the cost of the med, which has been
estimated at no more than $1.00. Coincidentally, that is about the same
cost as the current polio vaccine. The original Salk vaccine costs to
the public were kept very low because Jonas Salk was a humanitarian, not
a corporate goniff, and if memory serves, did not patent his medication.
I remember distinctly as a little kid lining up at the local elementary
school, where doctors and nurses had volunteered to inoculate every
schoolkid in New Haven at no cost to parents.

I agree that this EpiPen deal is highway robbery and if the government
wants to do something, they should streamline the process for someone
to knock this product off but that is cutting back on regulation so
you are automatically against it. The drug itself is generic and dirt
cheap. The patent is in the little bit of plastic that injects it.
This is not rocket science and if FDA would loosen it's grip, any
injection molding shop would be popping them out for a buck or less
each.
It would cost more to certify the shop that loads the drug than the
drug and the injector combined. Knocking off products in any other
industry is common if not the rule. It is not shocking to me that the
medical devices industry is the glaring exception. You only have to
look at the size of the bribes they send legislators here. They have
already sent the politicians over $161 million in this cycle alone
(15% of that to Hillary, by far the largest single benefactor) .
I know you think regulation is the panacea but, as long as the people
who write the regulation, are taking money from the regulated
industries, only the companies who can pony up that kind of money will
be served by that regulation. It is not the consumer who benefits and
it is not the small company that wants to compete. Regulation mainly
benefits the people who can pay to mold that regulation.


Sorry, but I don't buy your explanation for the epipen ripoff.
Competition isn't going to drive the price down to $10 where it belongs
for a minor drug that was developed decades ago and is dirt cheap to
produce. The cause is simple: corporate greed. I appreciate that a
company that develops a new and important drug is entitled to recover
its costs and make a profit, and that's what the patents provide. But
drug prices are just plain out of control and need reigning in by
whatever means are possible. Charging $300 for a drug that costs at most
$2 or $3 to product, and another $2 to market is insanity. There's more
to life and to a sane society than corporate profits. If the damned pens
cost $5 to make and distribute through the wholesale chain, and they
sold for $25 each, then a case could be made. Beyond that, there is just
plain old greed, and greed is what is destroying this country.



Why won't completion drive down the even $100 price?

Dear EpiPen Customers . . .
 

Justan Olphart wrote:
On 8/31/2016 3:12 PM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 8/31/16 3:05 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 31 Aug 2016 13:40:20 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:


The current scandal over the epipen price gouging has nothing to do with
development of the product or the cost of the med, which has been
estimated at no more than $1.00. Coincidentally, that is about the same
cost as the current polio vaccine. The original Salk vaccine costs to
the public were kept very low because Jonas Salk was a humanitarian, not
a corporate goniff, and if memory serves, did not patent his medication.
I remember distinctly as a little kid lining up at the local elementary
school, where doctors and nurses had volunteered to inoculate every
schoolkid in New Haven at no cost to parents.

I agree that this EpiPen deal is highway robbery and if the government
wants to do something, they should streamline the process for someone
to knock this product off but that is cutting back on regulation so
you are automatically against it. The drug itself is generic and dirt
cheap. The patent is in the little bit of plastic that injects it.
This is not rocket science and if FDA would loosen it's grip, any
injection molding shop would be popping them out for a buck or less
each.
It would cost more to certify the shop that loads the drug than the
drug and the injector combined. Knocking off products in any other
industry is common if not the rule. It is not shocking to me that the
medical devices industry is the glaring exception. You only have to
look at the size of the bribes they send legislators here. They have
already sent the politicians over $161 million in this cycle alone
(15% of that to Hillary, by far the largest single benefactor) .
I know you think regulation is the panacea but, as long as the people
who write the regulation, are taking money from the regulated
industries, only the companies who can pony up that kind of money will
be served by that regulation. It is not the consumer who benefits and
it is not the small company that wants to compete. Regulation mainly
benefits the people who can pay to mold that regulation.


Sorry, but I don't buy your explanation for the epipen ripoff.
Competition isn't going to drive the price down to $10 where it belongs
for a minor drug that was developed decades ago and is dirt cheap to
produce. The cause is simple: corporate greed. I appreciate that a
company that develops a new and important drug is entitled to recover
its costs and make a profit, and that's what the patents provide. But
drug prices are just plain out of control and need reigning in by
whatever means are possible. Charging $300 for a drug that costs at most
$2 or $3 to product, and another $2 to market is insanity. There's more
to life and to a sane society than corporate profits. If the damned pens
cost $5 to make and distribute through the wholesale chain, and they
sold for $25 each, then a case could be made. Beyond that, there is just
plain old greed, and greed is what is destroying this country.

What does a former jingle writer know about running a successful business?


Twice bankrupt is telling.

Dear EpiPen Customers . . .
 

Keyser Soze wrote:

No it isn't, because the Bill, because of the current GOP control of
Congress, isn't going anywhere. That's the same reason Social Security
why Medicare isn't able to negotiate drug prices, because of the GOP
control of Congress. That impediment has to be removed.


Write much?

Dear EpiPen Customers . . .
 

Justan Olphart wrote:
On 8/31/2016 3:12 PM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 8/31/16 3:05 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 31 Aug 2016 13:40:20 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:


The current scandal over the epipen price gouging has nothing to do
with
development of the product or the cost of the med, which has been
estimated at no more than $1.00. Coincidentally, that is about the
same
cost as the current polio vaccine. The original Salk vaccine costs to
the public were kept very low because Jonas Salk was a
humanitarian, not
a corporate goniff, and if memory serves, did not patent his
medication.
I remember distinctly as a little kid lining up at the local
elementary
school, where doctors and nurses had volunteered to inoculate every
schoolkid in New Haven at no cost to parents.

I agree that this EpiPen deal is highway robbery and if the government
wants to do something, they should streamline the process for someone
to knock this product off but that is cutting back on regulation so
you are automatically against it. The drug itself is generic and dirt
cheap. The patent is in the little bit of plastic that injects it.
This is not rocket science and if FDA would loosen it's grip, any
injection molding shop would be popping them out for a buck or less
each.
It would cost more to certify the shop that loads the drug than the
drug and the injector combined. Knocking off products in any other
industry is common if not the rule. It is not shocking to me that the
medical devices industry is the glaring exception. You only have to
look at the size of the bribes they send legislators here. They have
already sent the politicians over $161 million in this cycle alone
(15% of that to Hillary, by far the largest single benefactor) .
I know you think regulation is the panacea but, as long as the people
who write the regulation, are taking money from the regulated
industries, only the companies who can pony up that kind of money will
be served by that regulation. It is not the consumer who benefits and
it is not the small company that wants to compete. Regulation mainly
benefits the people who can pay to mold that regulation.


Sorry, but I don't buy your explanation for the epipen ripoff.
Competition isn't going to drive the price down to $10 where it belongs
for a minor drug that was developed decades ago and is dirt cheap to
produce. The cause is simple: corporate greed. I appreciate that a
company that develops a new and important drug is entitled to recover
its costs and make a profit, and that's what the patents provide. But
drug prices are just plain out of control and need reigning in by
whatever means are possible. Charging $300 for a drug that costs at most
$2 or $3 to product, and another $2 to market is insanity. There's more
to life and to a sane society than corporate profits. If the damned pens
cost $5 to make and distribute through the wholesale chain, and they
sold for $25 each, then a case could be made. Beyond that, there is just
plain old greed, and greed is what is destroying this country.

What does a former jingle writer know about running a successful
business?
Zero. He can't handle his own finances.

Dear EpiPen Customers . . .
 

On Tuesday, August 30, 2016 at 9:45:56 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Tue, 30 Aug 2016 21:11:30 -0500, Califbill
wrote:

Keyser Soze wrote:

The Repugnant-controlled Congress won't allow the proper legislation to
get anyway. Bernie Sanders has introduced a bill to remedy and reign in
the Big Pharma Banksters, but it isn't going to go anywhere until
Hillary takes over the White House.


.yup, all republican fault. Not the fact a Democrat senator's daughter is
in charge of the ripoff.

Harry is full of **** as usual.

Yes. As usual. No explanation necessary.