I'm trying to fathom your point. Regardless of how much rent or mortgages cost, do you think it's acceptable or fair for individuals with chronic illnesses to bear the cost of a treatment which would cost them more than their rent (i.e. an additional cost which healthy people wouldn't have to pay?). That sounds like a pretty bad deal if you ask me - not only would one have to deal with a chronic disease, one would also have to budget for a (very considerable) additional expenditure which healthy individuals wouldn't have. At the end of the day, that is what makes the price of Humira unfair and immoral - its ability to severely financially disadvantage its patients (by being priced disproportionately compared to the cost of R&D / production).

Now, if you're talking about spreading the cost of all medical care across the entirety of the working-age population (essentially, national insurance) - that's a more sensible proposition. In fact, that's (broadly speaking, of course) what the NHS does in the UK - and the system works quite well.