Over the past two weeks we have seen a major clash between the free market and “viral” ethics.  You’ve probably heard of Martin Shkreli by now – the 32-year-old founder of Turing Pharmaceuticals who raised the price of nearly twice his age drug Daraprim (62 to be exact) from $13.50 a pill to $750.  To make the matter worse, Daraprimis used to treat toxoplasmosis, a parasitic infection that can be life-threatening to some babies and people with AIDS and cancer.  When Turing raised the price of Daraprim, it meant that cost of treatment for patients rose from about $1,130 to $63,000 and for certain patients up to $634,000.

Turing defended his position by arguing that his company was forced to raise the price to offset costs of other research and development.  After internet outrage and organizations like The Infectious Diseases Society of America and the HIV Medicine Association Increase protested the increase saying that it was “unjustifiable for the medically vulnerable patient population in need” of the medication, Turning backed down and announced they would be lowering the price.

I think there are two takeaways from this.  (1) What would have been an acceptable price increase?  If you believe in the free market and recognize that companies have to turn a profit, where is the line of acceptability?  (2) Why are drugs so expensive in America?  For example, Gleevac (used to treat leukemia) has a yearly price tag of $106, 332 in the U.S. compared to $31,867 in the UK and costs approximately $159 to make.  Many of the presidential candidates have made soaring drug prices a major campaign issue with promises for reform.

So, what do you all think about this issue?  Is it time for drug price reform in America?  Are there other solutions?