NHS to Pay 25% More for Innovative Drugs as UK and US Strike New Deal
The National Health Service (NHS) in England will have to pay an additional £3 billion a year for new medicines by 2035, following the signing of a zero-tariff deal with the United States. The agreement, which marks a significant shift in the way innovative therapies are procured and priced within the NHS, has sparked intense debate about the sustainability of the increased spending.
Under the terms of the deal, the NHS will allocate 0.6% of its GDP to purchasing innovative drugs, compared to the current 0.3%. This represents a doubling of the funding for new medicines over the next decade. The increased expenditure is expected to cost the NHS an additional £25 billion by 2035.
Critics argue that the deal is an example of "Trump shakedowns" and that ministers have caved in to US pressure to increase spending on drugs supplied to the NHS. The Liberal Democrats have described the agreement as a "betrayal" of patients' interests, with Helen Morgan, the party's health spokesperson, warning that the increased costs will lead to further rationing of treatments.
NHS leaders argue that the deal is necessary to ensure access to groundbreaking new medicines for tens of thousands of patients. However, they have also warned that the NHS lacks sufficient funding to absorb the additional costs, and that budgets for care, services, and treatment must not be raided.
Dr Andrew Hill, an expert on the drugs industry at the University of Liverpool, has expressed concerns about the deal's impact on NHS funding. He warns that increased spending on innovative medicines will mean less money for doctors, nurses, ambulances, and other essential services.
The deal also includes a new rebate scheme under which drug companies will pay 15% of revenue from sales of branded medicines to the NHS. This is significantly lower than the current rate of 23.5-35.6%. Industry leaders have welcomed the changes as an important step towards ensuring patients can access innovative medicines needed to improve NHS health outcomes.
However, the deal has been met with skepticism by some, who argue that it is a "reform" in name only and that the true beneficiaries will be US drug companies. The Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry has welcomed the agreement, but warned that more needs to be done to address the issues of pharmaceutical pricing and procurement.
As the NHS prepares to implement this new deal, there are concerns about how it will be funded and who will ultimately bear the cost of increased spending on innovative medicines. With the UK facing significant budget pressures, it remains to be seen whether the government can absorb the additional costs without compromising other essential services.
The National Health Service (NHS) in England will have to pay an additional £3 billion a year for new medicines by 2035, following the signing of a zero-tariff deal with the United States. The agreement, which marks a significant shift in the way innovative therapies are procured and priced within the NHS, has sparked intense debate about the sustainability of the increased spending.
Under the terms of the deal, the NHS will allocate 0.6% of its GDP to purchasing innovative drugs, compared to the current 0.3%. This represents a doubling of the funding for new medicines over the next decade. The increased expenditure is expected to cost the NHS an additional £25 billion by 2035.
Critics argue that the deal is an example of "Trump shakedowns" and that ministers have caved in to US pressure to increase spending on drugs supplied to the NHS. The Liberal Democrats have described the agreement as a "betrayal" of patients' interests, with Helen Morgan, the party's health spokesperson, warning that the increased costs will lead to further rationing of treatments.
NHS leaders argue that the deal is necessary to ensure access to groundbreaking new medicines for tens of thousands of patients. However, they have also warned that the NHS lacks sufficient funding to absorb the additional costs, and that budgets for care, services, and treatment must not be raided.
Dr Andrew Hill, an expert on the drugs industry at the University of Liverpool, has expressed concerns about the deal's impact on NHS funding. He warns that increased spending on innovative medicines will mean less money for doctors, nurses, ambulances, and other essential services.
The deal also includes a new rebate scheme under which drug companies will pay 15% of revenue from sales of branded medicines to the NHS. This is significantly lower than the current rate of 23.5-35.6%. Industry leaders have welcomed the changes as an important step towards ensuring patients can access innovative medicines needed to improve NHS health outcomes.
However, the deal has been met with skepticism by some, who argue that it is a "reform" in name only and that the true beneficiaries will be US drug companies. The Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry has welcomed the agreement, but warned that more needs to be done to address the issues of pharmaceutical pricing and procurement.
As the NHS prepares to implement this new deal, there are concerns about how it will be funded and who will ultimately bear the cost of increased spending on innovative medicines. With the UK facing significant budget pressures, it remains to be seen whether the government can absorb the additional costs without compromising other essential services.
They're shelling out an extra £3 billion a year by 2035 - that's like throwing £250 million at those fancy new cancer cures every month! 
But seriously, folks, how are they gonna pay for this? The gov's gotta make some tough decisions... or just put on a brave face and say "We're all gonna be fine!" 
Can't wait to see the politicians try to spin this one - it's gonna be a real treat! 
. We need to prioritize healthcare over profits for big pharma 
I'm so sick of these 'innovative' deals that just line the pockets of big pharma companies 
. 25% more for new medicines? That's just a fancy way of saying they're gonna raise prices even higher 
. And don't even get me started on the "rebate scheme"... 15% of revenue? That's still a rip-off imho 
It's all about who's got the most clout and who can negotiate a better deal 
I mean, £3 billion extra in 10 years? That's just a drop in the bucket compared to the NHS's overall budget 
️ But you know what they say - "follow the money" 
This deal has all the makings of a classic case of crony capitalism 
The question is, who's gonna foot the bill for this increased spending? Won't it just come out of our taxes like everything else? 
we should be asking why is this happening now, not just how are we gonna pay for it 
What does it say about our priorities as a society? Are we so desperate for breakthroughs in medicine that we'll compromise the very fabric of our healthcare system? And what's the real motive behind this deal, anyway? Is it really just about making innovative medicines more affordable or is there something more at play? 
I feel so bad for all those patients who are gonna have to pay more for their meds 
It's so unfair 
I hope someone comes up with a solution soon because this is just gonna get out of hand 
NHS is about to drop £3 BILLION a year on new meds by 2035 
And £3 billion a year by 2035? 
. I'm not sure if this deal is a win or a loss for patients 
, but on the other hand, where's the thought to how we're gonna pay for it all? 
I don't get why we gotta pay 25% more for new meds... 
Did the gov just give in to some big pharma pressure? 
.
.
