That's because we're paying the money for the development and approval of these drugs, which for each successful one has historically roughly tracked the cost of a single strategic bomber. In a Tragedy of the Commons method monopsonies like your NHS then dictate prices not far about cost of materials and production, vs., to put it pejoratively, paying your "fair share" for the existence and availability of the drug in the first place.

Don't worry, the way things are going, bit by bit, sooner or later, the US will "fix" this problem and there will be no new drugs (aside from the occasional totally politicized efforts). And people will relearn what it's like to live in a world where bacterial infections are well nigh untreatable.

This gets brought up and debunked in every single thread on this topic.

I'd be interested in seeing the data to support your claim.

Turn it around: it's well established that bringing a drug to market costs 100s of millions of USD (R&D, Phase 1-3 trials, the long time and limited patent protection from that, all the failures along the way, etc.). Drug companies do not make large profits compared to other companies. Where does the money come from? Where can it come from?

I understand your argument, but the assumption it's based on - that pharmaceutical industry income is disproportionally financed by the USA when compared (per treatment) to other developed nations - requires supporting data.

Some sure indicates there are price controls, although curiously not in Germany per: http://www.taylorwessing.com/synapse/regulatory_pricecontrol...

NHS price controls are set below (much of?) the rest of the EU, resulting in diversion and shortages. Also, as is not surprising with monopsonies, some companies are ripping off the NHS on generics. You can find items on both with this search: https://www.google.com/search?q=nhs+drug+price+controls

According to the association that represents the pharmaceutical industry in Britain, the shortages you refer to were due to pharmacies taking advantage of exchange rate differences to sell medicines abroad rather than supply the UK market[1]. This would imply that the costs of medicine are not usually significantly lower than the rest of the EU, at least when the currency markets are not in flux.

There is some information available on the cost of prescription medicines in the UK (see [2]) but I don't know where the equivalent datasets would be for other countries. Would be interesting to do a comparison.

[1] http://www.abpi.org.uk/our-work/news/2012/Pages/280212.aspx

[2] http://www.hscic.gov.uk/searchcatalogue?q=title:"prescriptio...

The biggest part of the story, somewhat hidden, is that only after expert intervention can a charge for $1,400 be reduced to $112.

    But he was shocked when the pharmacy said he would have to pay $1,400 
    out of pocket for a 90-day supply. ... 

   "...If I've got to pay $1,000 more dollars for drugs ... then it's 
   not worth it," he said.

   Fortunately, Hurd called his doctor and was able to switch to a 
   cheaper brand of insulin and ended up paying only $112.

Please do glance at http://www.truecostofhealthcare.org/