Improved Coverage, Not Quick Fixes, Answer To Prescription Issue

We agree with the conclusion of your Aug. 31 editorial: “If seniors finally get access to much-deserved affordable drugs, this election season will be one of the most successful in history.” However, the solution to this nationwide problem must be more than politics and quick fixes. The solution must be lasting and not injure patients or research in the process.

The answer is better insurance coverage. A $10-$15 co-payment for a prescription is a lot better to a senior on a fixed income than a 10 percent to 15 percent discount. Discounts may seem attractive and probably would help, but if you can’t afford a $150 prescription, you probably can’t afford the same prescription at $135.

Coverage will also help seniors more than imposed price controls. Besides hurting seniors in their pocketbooks, efforts to implement price controls have historically hurt our industry. As representatives of companies that are searching for cures to an entire spectrum of debilitating and deadly diseases, we can tell you that price controls will have a direct impact on the biotechnology industry’s ability to help save lives.

Price control efforts in 1993-94 during the Clinton healthcare reform debate dried up investment in biotechnology research and slowed drug development. Current price-control efforts in the House and Senate may have the same effect if they progress.

Biotechnology and medical device employment is one of the fastest-growing sectors of the state’s economy, with an increase of 12.6 percent since 1998 to 15,000 people at the end of 1999. Biotech companies attract more than a billion dollars into the state to be used for research and training focused on health science and environmental-related basic science. We do not want to stifle the current climate of innovation, as any measure that introduces a form of price controls is certain to do.

A recent study by Ernst & Young found that the medical biotech industry in 1999 spent $11 billion on research and development, more than 50 percent of its revenues, which totaled $20 billion for the year. The industry also paid $10 billion in federal, state and local taxes.

Small biotech companies - many of whom are years away from having commercial sale - are in the forefront of discovering, developing and bringing to market the next generation of life-saving medicines. Many drugs are targeted at preventing or curing diseases that affect seniors, highlighting the importance of ensuring seniors’ access to these medicines and helping them get drug coverage.

As a result of industry investment in research, life-threatening diseases like AIDS and cancer have been transformed into treatable conditions. Return-to-work rates for individuals with serious mental illness increase 20 percent with new medicines.

The costs to bring drugs to market are not small. New medicines are developed by private sector, research-based pharmaceutical companies who have to spend about $500 million over 12-15 years to bring one medicine from the lab to the medicine cabinet. Most drugs fail. It’s a long road just to get to the clinical trials stage. Then, for every five biotechnology drugs that enter clinical trials, the FDA approves only one.

Even the medicines that make it don’t always recoup the research and investment costs. Only three of ten generate enough revenue to pay for themselves.

We must also avoid other quick fixes like allowing the reimportation of U.S. made drugs that have been shipped to Canada or Mexico. Recently passed congressional measures would prevent the Food and Drug Administration from protecting U.S. patients from spoiled or unsafe medicines. Neither the FDA nor the importer would be able to determine if the medicines were stored, handled and shipped properly after leaving the United States. It would therefore be impossible to determine if they are safe when reimported.

Increasing seniors’ access to prescription drugs through fiscally responsible, decentralized, private-sector coverage is the best way to help seniors gain access to drugs that are safe and affordable. We need to support subsidized private sector coverage for people unable to afford the full cost of prescription drugs.

The way to achieve this is to provide seniors and the disabled with affordable access to private-sector drug coverage that includes stop-loss provisions. Stop-loss limits out-of-pocket expenses when seniors and the disabled are sickest and their drug bills are the highest.

We also believe those of us in the fifth congressional district are being well served by the hard work and commitment that Rep. George Nethercutt has shown on this issue. Not only has he shown his support for seniors and others who are lacking coverage for their medicines, he also understands the importance of preserving research and development for one of Washington’s leading industries.

Yes, it is time to solve this problem but we need to ensure the politics of an election season don’t bring us answers that hurt patients, research and the promise of new cures.