Higher Drug Prices from Anticompetitive Conduct: Three Case Studies

U.S. consumers pay high drug prices. Brand-name drug companies claim that these prices are justified by pathbreaking research and development. But, sometimes the prices result from anticompetitive conduct. This article offers three case studies of how such behavior can increase price based on wakefulness drug Provigil, the allergic-reaction-treating EpiPen, and infection-treating Daraprim. The article contends that behavior that makes no sense other than by harming a competitor, that undercuts a regulatory regime, or that involves collusive conduct should not be protected. In targeting this behavior, antitrust scrutiny promises to lower drug prices.

The Health Impact Fund: a potential solution to inequity in global drug access

Global health inequities persist despite significant increases in funding and a growing number of global health initiatives. Especially vulnerable to disease, the poor majority of the world's population currently cannot afford advanced medicines, and the diseases confined to the poor receive little attention from pharmaceutical research. As a complement to the existing intellectual property regime, we have proposed the Health Impact Fund (HIF) as a mechanism that would create incentives for the development and optimal promotion of new high-impact medicines sold at the cost of manufacture. In this article, we outline the HIF and its ethical significance.