Xref: utzoo sci.bio:2308 soc.motss:20139
Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!agate!eos!riacs!drogers@riacs.edu
From: drogers@riacs.edu (David Christopher Rogers)
Newsgroups: sci.bio,soc.motss
Subject: Re: Why AZT is so expensive
Message-ID: <1704@hydra.riacs.edu>
Date: 15 Sep 89 02:48:49 GMT
References: <26871@shemp.CS.UCLA.EDU> <1187@nih-csl.UUCP> <2434@aecom.yu.edu>
Sender: drogers@riacs.edu
Organization: RIACS, NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA
Lines: 47

[Apologies if this is appearing twice.  My mailer barfed trying to post to 
 sci.med.aids]

    Message-ID: <2434@aecom.yu.edu> 
    From: werner@aecom.yu.edu (Craig Werner)

	While we're on the subject of conspiracy theories, here's a bit
    of debunking.  The cost of AZT is usually expressed as an annual cost:
    $8000-10,000.  That seems like a lot of money because it probably is
    a lot of money.

    However, a rough estimate of the cost of producing AZT places
    the actual cost of production at about 20-35% the cost that it is actually
    sold for.  

In other words, a cost of production somewhere between $1600 and $3500
for a years dose.  And a profit somewhere between $5200 and $8000 a year
for each person taking it.

    True, that's a 300% markup, but considering the cost of clinical
    trials, that's actually not way out of line. AZT is a biochemical, and it
    costs roughly $20/gram.  That's about $2  pill.. 

Considering the drug was initially developed at public expense in government
labs, this seems pricey.  (BTW, B-W claims a cost of about $1.50/pill).

The "cost of clinical trials" being used to justify the cost of AZT would
be funny if the clinical trials weren't in such a shambles.

ACT-UP has asked Burroughs-Wellcome to justify their cost by opening their
books, or lower the price.  They have refused to do either.

I've even heard it said how much money B-W has LOST on AZT.  Even THEY 
haven't claimed any loss of money on this product.

    Quite a  commonly used pharmaceutical drugs  cost more than that, but 
    are used for only short periods of time.  AZT is taken 4 times a day, 
    for the rest of one's life, or until  it can no longer be tolerated.  

How many "commonly-used" drugs have a profit-margin of > $5000 per person/yr?
And a customer base that may be >1M in a few years??

The real issue is that Burroughs-Wellcome has only a 7-year monopoly on 
AZT granted by the government, and they want to soak as much as they can
out of it before they lose the monopoly or government finished one of its
longwinded trials and authorizes some other drug.

    That's why it costs so much. It's not the first prescription that 
    gets you, it's all the refills.

Damn right.  The only debunking to do here is the myth of the drug company
acting in the interests of the patients, when it's actually soaking the
patients and the taxpayers on its government-granted monopoly.

David Christopher Rogers
drogers@riacs.edu