There should be no laws imposing price controls.

Congress has no right to dictate or manipulate prices and advertising either. Neither do the other countries, which control health care and use that as a means to "negotiate" prices.

An advertised price isn't a "list price" anyway.

"Shaming" private companies in order to try manipulate prices is not a legitimate function of government.

No one is intelligent enough to make government dictates in the economy "work".

If they falsely stated a price which turned out not to be the truth, then, yes, they should be legally held accountable. But that is different from just not advertising the price.

So Oakley's "disppointed" because, in this instance,
she is not allowed to tyrannize over people? Oh, boo-hoo-hoo!

Healthcare is mired in political manipulation. This is why many claim it needs to be more manipulated with more politics and more central planning.
Their motto seems to be, “If it’s broke, break it more.”

I failed to indicate that I don't share this "zero concern for the retail cost of any drug."

I understand and agree....and I DO care about the price of medication of every sort. It's also interesting to note that in many instances, if one doesn't have "insurance" the price drops dramatically. One frequently just has to let the medical provider know that you won't be burdening them with the insurance requirements. I have an MD friend who often laments the cost to him of an employee whose full-time job is to interface with insurance companies, provide the necessary documents, and obtain the requisite permissions to get paid.

This is not 'drug prices' but related medical prices. My eye was caught a few years back by a simple study at Washington University of St.Louis.

They called 2 hospitals in each state plus the District of Columbia to find out what the cost would be for their "62 year old grandmother with no health insurance" to have a total hip replacement. They knew the proper CPT codes for the procedures.

"The results show that 40% of the top-ranked orthopedic hospitals and 36% of those not in the top rankings were not able to provide an estimated price for a total hip replacement.

Plus, of those that could give an estimate, there was a tenfold difference between the lowest at $11,100 and the highest at $125,798.

Rosenthal describes the variation as "striking", particularly as they "tried to give each hospital identical information in terms of what the procedure would require".

Only 9 of the 20 top-ranked hospitals (45%) and 10 of the ones not in the top ranking (10%) were able to give a completed bundled price for the procedure.

The researchers were able to compile complete prices for another 3 top-ranked (15%) and 54 non-top-ranked (53%) by contacting the hospitals and the affiliated physician surgeries separately.

Putting these results together, the complete price ranged from $12,500 to $105,000 at top-ranked hospitals and from $11,100 to $125,798 at non- top-ranked hospitals."

One cannot use the "market" to control costs if it's impossible to figure out what things are going to cost until you get a bill.

TANSTAAFL - your epi pen does not cost $25. Your out of pocket cost is $25. One way or another you are paying the other $675, either in insurance payments or if your employer is paying then there is less money to pay you.

The current system makes all providers appear to cost the same. If we started having "lunch" insurance so that your lunch cost the same at fast food or a steak house, would you ever eat fast food again? And would lunch insurance be affordable?

I think that all depends on how is buying it and for what reason. (Mine doesn’t cost that much - about $100 for two ounces, which lasts ME about two months.)

I am far more concerned about the prosecutors for Dallas county ignoring the actual law and continuing to have people arrested and held “while they are testing the concentration of THC in the CBD.”

At this point, up to .3% is allowed but it’s far too easy to harass people for buying a perfectly legit product. I told this prosecutor that if that was the worst crime she could find to have “investigated,” she should find another job.

Very good point and it's the underlying primary factor in high prices of medical care and products- little (or none) free market price feedback between the one paying and the one receiving the goods. (Remarkably similar to socialism.)

In this area, that gallon of milk will have a different price in different Kroger stores 5 miles apart (depending on the local neighborhood demographics, I presume.)

Many, if not most people have zero concern for the 'retail' cost of any drug, because they have insurance. So why should I care that the retail price of an Epi-Pen is $700 if it only costs me $25? No matter where I am.

The determining factor is what insurance company I use.

Of course if we end up with single payer, the entire discussion is moot.

My next observation: Would drug companies be forced to have multiple versions of their commercials with different prices, depending on where the ads were running?

I can go into a Kroger in Indianapolis and buy a gallon of milk for some price. That same gallon of milk won't cost the same in a Publix in Murrells Inlet SC or a King Soopers in Denver.

I'm operating under the assumption that the retail prices for a prescription in New York City or Los Angeles will be significantly different than the exact same prescription in Topeka or Dallas or Portland.

If I'm wrong in that assumption, I'll shut up.

But if I'm right, then forcing the prices to be revealed would force perhaps dozens of the same ads to be produced, based on the targeted areas.

I think the "idea" is if all the prices are revealed, the higher-priced ones will be "shamed" into reducing their prices to be more competitive.

Given the attitude of the guy that sells Epi-Pens, I don't think shame is anywhere in his vocabulary (even though he is currently in prison, or was, recently). I hate, hate HATE to see people gouged (and I DO have a dog in that fight because I have several family members with extreme allergies).

But it seems to me that this is a great opportunity for an inventor or someone with some character to come in and take away all the high-priced sales. NOT to have it legislated, but with old-fashioned market tactics. There's no good thing about legislated prices, IMO.

The judge is probably correct. This is a matter for Congress to address through legislation. Of course, big pharma has control of most Congressmen, so $5Au is not optimistic anything will get done on this issue.

I’d just like a law that requires US sales to be at less than (let’s say 10%) above the minimum price offered to any buyer, internationally. If they negotiated with another government for a price, let’s get the benefit of it.

Putting on my bulls eye...

Just to play devil's advocate, if the government can force drug manufacturers to list the price of a 30-day supply, why couldn't they force every company that advertises in magazines, on television, or in newspapers to list their prices? I'm just not sure I see why it's considered a positive to force drug companies to include pricing information.

I wonder if that CBD oil is worth $85.97 an ounce?

No surprise there.

Obama was in bed with big Pharma They helped him push through Obamacare.

Even though it did not exactly worked out as they expected.

If DHHS is involved, it's gotta be a stupid idea. They have over 80,000 employees sitting around thinking up stupid things to do because they aren't intelligent enough to work in the real world.

what? Prices subject to change without notice? Classic

Why? Everything else has a price. I worry about some of these judges. They must not have enough real work to keep them busy.