Turing’s Fortune

In the month of August, Turing Pharmaceuticals acquired the drug Darapim. Darapim, considered as one of the most important medications by the World Health Organizations, is essential to the treatment of toxoplasmosis, an infection deadly to HIV positive and malaria-infected people. The 62-year-old drug was accessible to most of the HIV positive demography, but Martin Shkreli, the founder of Turing Pharmaceuticals, had different plans. Hoping to fund research for a better Darapim drug and to make the drug more profitable, he raised the price from $13.50 to $750 per tablet—a 5000 percent increase.When media got hold of and then presented this story, Shkreli was harshly criticized. Many doctors, including biotech editor John Carroll and Judith Aberg, a spokeswoman for the HIV Medicine Association, have questioned whether the drug even needs to be developed. Outside the medical industry, Donald Trump called Shkreli a “spoiled brat,” and Democrats Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton have both called for reforms in the Drug Market.Shkreli, known for his volatile temperament, has done little to address his critics but criticize them back. He called Carroll a “bad journalists who doesn’t check facts or think logically,” and he recently tweeted saying, “It seems like the media immediately points a finger at me so I point one back at em, but not the index or pinkie.” Shkreli still maintains his claims that he can now do adequate research in the development of Darapim and that before the price increase, the drug was not profitable.While it’s great that the media has grilled Shkreli for an explanation, they still fail to acknowledge the prevalence of Shkreli’s tacticts. Shkrelli was not lying when he mentioned that he was being singled out for a deed done by many. Cycloserine, a drug used to treat tuberculosis, went from $500 for 30 pills to $10,800 when Rodelis Therapeutics acquired it. Doxycycline went from $20 a bottle to $1849. Making matters worse is that drug companies do not have to share who manufactures their products. So when the new Hepatitis C drug is sold at $1000, all we have is their word that that’s a reasonable price.Clearly, many drug companies have chosen money over morality in their pricing. People with these threatening conditions and have no other choice but to buy the drugs to continue living, and so drug companies have noticed this need and are now exploiting them for it. Ideally, these companies could regulate themselves and make fair prices that are not fueled by avarice, but a need for government intervention appears greatly needed.Last Tuesday, Hillary Clinton made headlines when she declared a new policy that would cap drug prices to $250 for people with insurance, with the hopes of stopping people from “making a fortune off of others misfortune.” And while this plan has already received much criticism from insurance and biotech companies for its arbitrary cap and because it could halt many companies development of their drugs, affordability of drugs should take priority over their development. Bernie Sanders has proposed a similar plan where drug companies must be more transparent on their pricing and Americans have access to Canadian pharmacies. With more transparency, penalties would be put in place for companies that heighten prices solely for financial gain. Both of these proposed plans will make it harder for America to continue its dominance in the biotech industry, but also reveal the immoral ways we gained such dominance.Even more unfortunate than the immorality in the drug industry, is that many other markets show similar behavior. Many groceries, clothing stores and supermarkets take measures such as insourcing to gain a financial edge. The liberals argue that government regulation of markets take away our freedom, but in truth the free market benefits only the few who exploit, while the rest of us suffer. Last Tuesday, Shkreli made the announcement that his company will now lower the price of their drug so that they make a smaller profit. So, while public pressure pervailed in this particular case, the issue of excessive costs is still rampant in the drug industry. More so, even if we were to always make an uproar over every drug company that exploits those in need, there’s still the issue of other industries that all value the cash they make over the people they serve. Ultimately, regulation will need to step in on a more macro-level to curb the avarice of these companies and prevent people, such as Shkreli, from exploiting the needy.