Sunday, June 1, 2025
No Result
View All Result
CNAPS.org
  • Home
  • About
    • Why CNAPS ?
    • Advisory Council
    • Our Impact
  • Our Work
  • Contact
  • Home
  • About
    • Why CNAPS ?
    • Advisory Council
    • Our Impact
  • Our Work
  • Contact
No Result
View All Result
CNAPS.org
No Result
View All Result

Reference pricing will lead to poor access to critical drugs: John Adams in the Detroit News

Drugs are available sooner in the United States precisely because companies have pricing freedom. If the government sets artificially low prices, drug development will fall off and smaller biotechs doing much cutting-edge research will be squashed out of existence.

November 21, 2024
in Health Care
Reading Time: 3 mins read
A A
Reference pricing will lead to poor access to critical drugs: John Adams in the Detroit News

Image via Canva.

This article originally appeared in the Detroit News.

By John Adams, November 21, 2024

Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., just commissioned a Congressional Budget Office report that explores seven different strategies to reduce prescription drug prices. According to CBO, the strategy that would slash costs the most is “reference pricing,” or anchoring U.S. prices to the prices in Canada and other developed nations.

Cheaper drugs obviously sound great. But Americans should be careful what they wish for. As the Canadian father of a child with a rare disease, I urge my American friends to consider the unintended consequences.

My son has PKU, a genetic disorder that can lead to intellectual disabilities and seizures. Treatment must start within the first days of life to avoid the worst outcomes.

My family was lucky; we were able to come to the United States in 2007 for the first PKU drug, which was developed by a small biotech company. At the time, that drug wasn’t accessible to most Canadian patients who rely on government-run drug plans. Even to this day, two of our large provinces either do not cover it or provide extremely limited coverage.

The sorts of price controls that Sen. Sanders favors have limited access to new medicines in Canada and other nations with government-run health systems. Two-thirds of all new drugs worldwide are first released in the United States, after which there’s a one-year lag, on average, until the same drugs are launched in the next country.

Sometimes the wait is much longer. Of 287 new drugs released between 2018 and 2022, American patients had access to about three-quarters by the end of that period, according to a RAND study. But Germans could only get 52%, Brits got 43% and Canadians got a paltry 28%.

Slow-moving bureaucracies contribute to the problem: from 2012 to 2019, it took an average of 464 more days to approve a new medicine in Canada than in the United States. The situation is so bad that all provincial premiers (equivalent to state governors in the United States) are calling for major changes.

These huge access gaps stem from fundamentally different approaches to innovation, pricing and value. Historically, the United States has taken a free market attitude, allowing drug developers to price products based on market demand, whereas Canada undervalues innovation, controls prices and rations patient access.

The American system has made the United States the global leader in pharmaceutical research and development. One critical component of this system has been private firms’ willingness to license and develop promising discoveries that arise from National Institutes of Health-funded research at universities and elsewhere.

Implementing price controls that reference drug prices in other countries, as Sen. Sanders proposes, would eliminate the ability of private companies to earn a worthwhile return on these high-risk investments. As a consequence, fewer new products would come to market and patients will suffer.

Drugs are available sooner in the United States precisely because companies have pricing freedom. If the government sets artificially low prices, drug development will fall off and smaller biotechs doing much cutting-edge research will be squashed out of existence.

It’s true that Canada and other countries are freeloading off of U.S. R&D investments. That isn’t fair. But the solution isn’t for the United States to adopt policies that have been proven failures.

Further, price controls would largely fail to address a major reason patient costs are so high in the United States: Middlemen known as pharmacy benefit managers apply huge markups to many drugs.

Price controls are just one part of socialized health care. In these centralized systems, administrators manage costs by rationing access to all sorts of care — despite the negative consequences for patients. Currently, there are nearly 6.5 million patients without a family doctor, severe shortages of nurses and hospital beds, repeated closures of emergency departments and long wait times for care.

This rationing, especially of medicines, is shortsighted — because early treatment can save money in the long-term. Effective therapies lead to fewer emergencies, fewer hospitalizations and more days being productive and paying taxes. Focusing on initial cost while ignoring long-term value is a mistake.

Before Americans pick up bad ideas from abroad, they should take a hard look at the repercussions of those policies. Adopting elements of Canada’s system would end U.S. global leadership in drug development, hurt millions of patients desperate for new cures, and do little to address pharmacy benefit managers and other middlemen. America needs to safeguard its role as the world’s innovative medicine chest.


John Adams is CEO and co-founder of Canadian PKU and Allied Disorders (CanPKU+) and a senior fellow at the Macdonald Laurier Institute (MLI).

Source: The Detroit News
Tags: John Adams

This material is distributed by CNAPS on behalf of the Macdonald-Laurier Institute. Additional information is available at the Department of Justice, Washington, DC.

Previous Post

Hysteria is an unhelpful response to Trump’s tariff threat. Here’s what Canada can do instead: Derek H. Burney in the Hub

Next Post

The war on terror is coming home: Casey Babb in the Hill

Related Posts

Defending the Bayh-Dole Act, or why governments shouldn’t dictate the cost of drugs: Nigel Rawson and John Adams in The Hill
Health Care

Defending the Bayh-Dole Act, or why governments shouldn’t dictate the cost of drugs: Nigel Rawson and John Adams in The Hill

November 13, 2024
Health minister’s berating of suffering patients was downright cruel: Shawn Whatley in the National Post
Health Care

Health minister’s berating of suffering patients was downright cruel: Shawn Whatley in the National Post

March 13, 2024
How Canadians earned the right to life, liberty, and suicide: Daniel Dorman in the National Review
Health Care

How Canadians earned the right to life, liberty, and suicide: Daniel Dorman in the National Review

February 26, 2024
Next Post
The war on terror is coming home: Casey Babb in the Hill

The war on terror is coming home: Casey Babb in the Hill

Center for North American Prosperity and Security

The Macdonald-Laurier Institute (MLI) is a non-partisan 501(c)(3) organization in the US and a registered charity in Canada. CNAPS is a division of MLI.

© 2023 CNAPS. All rights reserved.
  • Home
  • About
  • Our Work
  • Contact

The Center for North American Prosperity and Security is a project of the Macdonald-Laurier Institute, Canada’s leading public policy think tank.

No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • About
    • Why CNAPS ?
    • Advisory Council
    • Our Impact
  • Our Work
  • Contact

© 2023 CNAPS. All rights reserved.