,
8 tweets,
2 min read
Read on Twitter
David brings some balance to the “NHS in a UK-US FTA debate”, but misses an important element (thread)
Another popular US ask in FTAs concerns medicine pricing. The US position is: we pay too much for drugs, financing their R&D - and you don’t pay enough. If memory serves Trump has repeated that position.
But beyond POTUS and the US ambassador speaking about FTAs - the USTR, the US agency in charge of negotiating FTAs, has included an item concerning this into the negotiating goals. Here it is. 
When it comes to this issue the UK is of particular concern for US pharma. Why? Because NICE (The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence) examines drugs - and also looks at cost-effectiveness. (There’ll be people better versed in the details of this than me)
And UK prices then enter the pricing polices of other countries through something referred to as “reference pricing”. So if the UK says “this drug has no marginal benefit, but costs way more” this has an impact beyond the UK.
What does that mean for the manufacturer? Its expensive drug will not be sold. The manufacturer might perceive this as a lack of full market access.
Pharma will push for better access to NICE, more transparency, a larger voice for pharma, more opportunities and rights for pharma to show that their expensive drug is SO worth it.
And higher drug costs will have an impact on the NHS. As always the devil will be in the detail. Detail counts.
