Massachusetts officials are drafting proposals to eliminate some medications covered by Medicaid, the health insurance program offered to low-income people, in an effort to lower drug prices. The state plans on conducting rigorous research and testing to determine the medical benefits, if any, specific drugs have for consumers.
By excluding some drugs and consequently the companies that produce them, Massachusetts hopes to reduce the amount of money the state spends on covering expenses for them, many of which have significantly raised in price over the last few years. Big Pharma is known for its exorbitant pricing and the seeming monopoly that many prescription drug sellers hold. And prices in Massachusetts are no exception, doubling over the past five years.
Politicians, including Massachusetts Gov. Charlie Baker, are concerned this pricing is preventing the state from paying attention to other aspects of health care; instead, most of the fiscal strain is placed on paying for drugs, which are overpriced and may or may not be effective to begin with.
However, this proposal is concerning because it seems to negatively affect the people the program is supposed to benefit, who may be struggling with conditions that require multiple drugs to treat their symptoms. This proposal does not seem effective in curbing drug spending costs, as other drug companies could feel motivated to raise their prices if other companies are eliminated from the competition. While a well-intentioned move by the state to gain some sort of control over the prices charged by drug companies in this country, if this measure goes into effect, it will work to hurt people more than it will actually lower drug prices.
Medicaid is used to help low-income students who are in need of health insurance coverage. Medical costs are a burden to many, so the state and federally funded package is used by many to help alleviate this burden. By no longer including drug options previously covered by the program, this places a strain on an already vulnerable population running low on financial resources. If struggling with a medical condition that requires a drug that may not be listed anymore, a person on Medicaid would have either have to go into debt to pay for it or suffer from their conditions and deal with the lack of substantial coverage. Surely this isn’t the direction Massachusetts, regarded as the medical hub and health care leader of the nation, intends to take.
People dealing with conditions like diabetes and epilepsy treat their symptoms by taking prescription medicine. To treat the side effects of these diseases, sometimes the more expensive option works. While there are several options to treat them, often only one of them works the best for each individual person.
Thus, putting people on Medicaid into a situation where their medicine of choice is no longer available is taxing not only for their physical health, but also mental health. Just like how every person is unique, every condition is unique and can warrant a different medication. People with these conditions have probably spent a few months or years trying to figure out which treatment works best for them. Treatments have different side effects for different people. Getting rid of options available to them would be directly negatively affecting their health and quality of life.
The fact is that by getting rid of any drug, people will be affected. While there is something to be said about Massachusetts taking initiative on reducing the escalating costs of drugs, this is not the way to do so. State officials should take into account the number of people affected by pulling certain drugs off of Medicaid, rather than the effects of these medications. Lowering prescription drug prices is a noble cause, but we shouldn’t be taking advantage of people from lower socioeconomic backgrounds and threatening their health.
