Yeah. Other countries generally solve this by not covering these treatments; for example there's no way this would be available on the NHS at this price. Somehow I suspect this would be a political non-starter in the US through.

How many people with some sort of inflammation are on anti-TNF-alpha aka. Humira (for arthritis, psoriasis, intestinal inflammation diseases, etc.) in the UK? It's a treatment covered by the NHS. While "only" £10,000 per patient per year, so an order of magnitude cheaper than what is discussed here, it's typically prescribed for orders of magnitude longer (as in several decades).

English prescribing is open data. The answer might be here: https://openprescribing.net/

Is Humira the same as adalimumab?

https://openprescribing.net/chemical/1001030S0/

https://openprescribing.net/analyse/#org=CCG&numIds=1001030S...

Yup, adalimumab is another name (naming of biologicals is weird). That data suggests about 500 people in the UK are on Humira; a bit lower than I expected, but I gather they only prescribe it as a drug of last resort.

However, if you click to get map data in the second link you give it's really weird. There's basically no subscription in most of England, but very high in a few small pockets, and not in any sensible pattern (e.g. if you scroll back a couple of months there's none in all of London, and these items are prescribed in a very regular way). Maybe this search somehow doesn't get all the data?

> there's no way this would be available on the NHS at this price

Really? If it works it could get approval.

http://www.pharmaceutical-journal.com/news-and-analysis/news...

£340,000 per year, but for a tiny number of people.

No, a huge portion of the US is on board with the idea that the government shouldn't be covering any medical care.

Apparently they don't even want the federal government having standards for acceptable insurance plans (but they want a federal law saying that the standards set by any state can be used to market plans in all states).