HP 609 Week 6 Discussion 1: Pharmaceuticals and Behavioral Health

The topic this writer chose is about pharmaceuticals.
Medication pricing has been causing a major obstruction in American health care costs due to its out of control rising. Despite the issue has been on the campaign debate and community discussion, there is still a minimal effect on its rising cost overall. The two policies identified in the article written by Luthra (2019), the Import drugs proposed by Sanders-Cummings and penalize price-gouging backed by multiple democratic leaders.
Import Drugs
This proposed policy is an attempt to enable providers, pharmacies and wholesalers to import medication from other countries where the cost of production is much lesser. The purpose of this policy is to go around the high price of medication manufactured in the U.S. The category of medication is mainly the proven effectiveness of generic medication. If this policy is adopted, it will affect the public skate holders as patients who can pay lower co-payment to daily medication; medicare and medicaid programs can save cost in medication coverage and physicians who potentially increase in medication compliance. The private stakeholders are private insurance companies that can also lower cost in medication coverage; pharmacies may face increased market competitions; Medication wholesale companies may be also blooming related to business profit. The Trump administration advertised this proposal during the presidential campaign. Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Klobuchar have a separate bill that is specific to patients getting medicine from Canada alone (Luthra. 2019). This proposed policy will be benefiting the chronic ill patients. For example, one vial of Humalog cost $339 in the U.S while pharmacy in Canada sells as $129 Canadian dollar in 2019(Rajkumar, 2020). If the U.S is able to initiate this policy, the cost is reduced in insulin alone is a tremendous saving for both insurances and patients.
Penalize Price-gouging
This proposed policy is backed by multiple democratic leaders and had already taken effect in Massachusetts as of 3/20/2020. According to Luthra (2019), “This policy mainly targets the manufacturers who raise drug prices more than 30 percent in five years. Punishments could include requiring the company to reimburse those who paid the elevated price, forcing the drug maker to lower its price, or charging a penalty up to three times what a company received from boosting the price”(Luthra, 2019). This policy again will benefit public stakeholders as payers (Including patients and insurance), government funding insurance programs and healthcare providers. The private stakeholder as the manufacturer who is aiming for profit making will be least pleased by the policy. Beside the politicians as Sens. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Kamala Harris (D-Calif.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) and Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), according to Luthra (2019), the policy played an important role in state economic regulation. Per Chakraborti & Roberts (2020), the Anti-price Gouging law was critical in controlling the skyrocketing price of sanitizers, Vitamin C, mask…etc. during the Covid pandemic.
Conclusion
The intention of policy is essential in designing the proposal direction. The benefit of the free market is to encourage competition in order to lower prices, but it will fail its purpose when monopoly comes in to dominate the market. Both Import drugs and anti-price gouging will benefit both economic and public medicine taker in financial burdens. There is also risk adding to it as a quality concern since the importer will also be a business who is aiming for profit making. The need to address this potential issue should be addressed before policy is adopted.

Looking for nursing papers writing help? Top Nursing Papers Writing Service Online is here. A team of professional nursing essay writers ready to help. Relieve academic stress! With you all through your education course. There is no nursing subject we cannot handle.

Reference

Chakraborti, R., & Roberts, G. (2020). Anti-price gouging laws, shortages, and COVID-19: big data insights from consumer searches.

Luthra, S. (January 2019). Drug-Pricing Policies Find New Momentum As “A 2020 Thing.” Kaiser Health News. Retrieved from https://khn.org/news/drug-pricing-policies-find-new-momentum-as-a-2020-thing/.

Rajkumar, S. V. (2020). The High Cost of Insulin in the United States: An Urgent Call to Action

Mayo Clinic Proceedings, Volume 95, Issue 1, 22 – 28

Due: In an effort to facilitate scholarly discourse, create your initial post by Day 4, and reply to at least two of your classmates, on two separate days, by Day 7.

Note: In this type of discussion, you will not see the responses of your classmates until after you have posted your own response to the question below.

Initial Post

Select one topic below to write about in your initial post. Please make it clearly which topic you chose to write about in your initial post. Write 500 to 750 words related to:

Pharmaceuticals: What two public policies have been recently proposed or adopted to support proper access to medications for all consumers, fair pricing, and reasonable regulation of new drugs coming to market? Who are the private and public stakeholders? Name some organizations advocating for policy changes.
Behavioral Health: What two public policies have been recently proposed or adopted to improve access to behavioral health services and treatment? Who are the private and public stakeholders? Name some organizations pushing for policy changes.

Cite additional sources beyond the Learning Materials for this week.

Replies

Reply to at least two of your classmates. In your reply posts, each reply should be on a topic different from the one you chose to write about. Each reply should be 200 to 400 words. You should cite at least one to two sources that add new information in response to your classmate’s post.

Please refer to the Grading Rubric for details on how this activity will be graded.

Posting to the Discussion Forum

Select the appropriate Thread.
Select Reply.
Create your post.
Select Post to Forum.

Nice post Qi! It was very informative, and helpful. I find the idea of pharmaceutical price gouging so unethical. I recently heard of a new drug available to those with primary hyperoxaluria. It is a rare liver disease that causes oxalate to build up and damage the kidneys, causing renal failure. The new medication is $ 500,000. A half a million dollars! When I inquired to one of the researchers about it, they said the company looks at it as a costs savings, since the individual will no longer require hemodialysis. I am not sure if that really is financially true, but either way, it seems like predatory pricing. I hope there is application in the price gouging policy you mention for the initial use as well. I just wanted to mention that, but really wanted to reply more in way of your imported pharmaceutical policy that you also refer too.

Top nursing paper writers on hand to assist you with assignment : HP 609 Week 6 Discussion 1: Pharmaceuticals and Behavioral Health

Importation is a two-way street. Even though the U.S. may benefit greatly in some ways by importing pharmaceuticals from Canada, the U.S. drug importation policy may not actually benefit Canada at all. They have very little to gain. Which brings in the feasibility of such policies other than for political soundbites. In an ongoing assessment prior to that policy, Canadian physicians and patients have been struggling with drug shortages for many years (Rawson & Binder, 2017). The legislation proposed in the United States for affordable and safe importation of drugs from Canada could accelerate our northern neighbor’s shortages of drugs in their own

country, therefore leaving the U.S scrambling for resources because of its policy induced over-reliance. The interesting article, points out that because the U.S. does not have price regulation or price control, it was estimated that 8% of respondents to a 2016 survey of American adults imported a prescription drug at one point (Rawson & Binder, 2017). Another important point that the article, albeit 4 years old but is just as relevant today, is who is going to oversee such a huge task of importing those drugs? The FDA lacked the resources in 2017 for such a major importation program (Rawson & Binder, 2017) and that was pre-COVID 19 vaccine and during a Republican administration. I am not sure even with the change of administration, and push for this policy that the Canadians will be fully on board. If they are, will it be at the expense of their own citizens for the idea of more American funds? After reading the Canadian author’s point of view, and the corresponding response from the Canadian Board of Directors at Partnership for Safe Medicine, I would say I have to agree. Canada’s drug supply is not a reasonable fix for our homegrown pharmaceutical pricing problem.

Rawson, N. S.B. & Binder, L. (2017) Importation of drugs into the United States from Canada. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 189 (24). https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.170372

487 words

Graduate Program in Health Administration Discussion Question Rubric

Note: The value of each of the criterion on this rubric represents a point range (example: 25–20 points, 20–15 points, 15–10 points, 10–0 points).

Discussion Board Rubric – 100 Points
Criteria	Exceeds Expectations	Meets Expectations	Needs Improvement	Inadequate	Total Points
Quality of Initial Post	Initial post is on time and of the correct length (500–750 words). All components of the initial post requirements are addressed. Course content synthesis is applied. References are included according to the Discussion instructions. 25 points	Initial post is on time and of the correct length (500–750 words). Most components of the initial post requirements are addressed. Course content synthesis is applied but limited. References are included according to the Discussion instructions. 20 points	Initial post is one day late. Does not meet the correct length (500–750 words). Some components of the initial post requirements are addressed. Course content synthesis is weak or missing. References are included but not according to the Discussion instructions. 15 points	Initial post is more than one day late. Initial post much fewer than (500–750 words). Few components of the initial post requirements are addressed. Course content synthesis is missing. References are not included. 10 points	25
Peer Replies	On time. There was substantial evidence and synthesis of course content utilizing course topics and the introduction of questions and new information. Replies are 200–400 words. References are included according to the Discussion instructions. 25 points	On time. There was some evidence and synthesis of course content utilizing course topics and the introduction of questions or new information. Replies are 200–400 words. References are included according to the Discussion instructions. 20 points	There was either some synthesis of course content or the introduction of questions or new information. Replies are less than 200 words. References are included but not according to the Discussion instructions. 15 points	There was little or no evidence of course content utilizing course topics or the introduction of questions or new information. Replies are less than 200 words References are not included. 10 points	25
Frequency of Contribution	Initial post with two peer replies posted on two separate days. 25 points	Initial post with two peer replies posted on the same day. 20 points	Initial post with one peer reply. 15 points	Only initial post submitted or only replied to peers. 10 points	25
Organization, Writing Mechanics, and APA Format	Clearly organized, no or limited writing mechanics and/or APA errors. 25 points	Clearly organized, few to some writing mechanics and/or APA errors. 20 points	Poorly organized, several to moderate writing mechanics and/or APA errors. 15 points	Poorly organized, many writing mechanics and/or APA errors. 10 points	25
Total points					100

HP 609 Week 6 Discussion 1: Pharmaceuticals and Behavioral Health