 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / Diabetes / April 2006SHOULD BE GOVT-ISSUE BG TESTER AND STICKS
It seems to me that an enormous amount of money could be saved on Medicare, Medicaid and general insurance costs if the U.S. Government would design and manufacture a standardized blood glucose tester (and strips). Since there are millions of diabetics in the USA, there is a huge economy of scale. It is incomprehensible to me that testing strips should cost as much as they do. Certainly if the U.S. Government put in the same research that they have used to send rockets to the moon, they could certainly manufacture test strips that cost less than $5 per hundred. That's probably the actual cost of the materials. By having to re-imburse millions of diabetics for ridiculously over-priced test strips, the government, and insurance companies, are wasting billions of dollars. This is one way that America could cut back on high medical expenses without sacrificing quality. >It seems to me that an enormous amount of money could be saved on >Medicare, Medicaid and general insurance costs if the U.S. Government [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] >This is one way that America could cut back on high medical expenses >without sacrificing quality. So long as the drug companies have such a strangle hold on members of Congress and the White House we are never going to see anything like you propose. The drug companies make way too much money on we diabetics to ever let someone else have part of this golden calf.  SignatureGrandpa Chuck -ô¿ô- ~ The following information is given with the utmost respect for the armed forces and civilians who have died in the current war in Iraq. According to http://icasualties.org/oif/ The number of Americans killed in Iraq as of Mar. 30, 2006 is 2,326. Americans wounded = more than 16,774 United Kingdom = 103 Other = 105 Iraqi deaths are probably in excess of 100,000. Today, March 31, 2006 It has been 1064 days since Bush declared, "Mission Accomplished in Iraq." > It seems to me that an enormous amount of money could be saved on > Medicare, Medicaid and general insurance costs if the U.S. Government > would design and manufacture a standardized blood glucose tester (and > strips). Since there are millions of diabetics in the USA, there is a > huge economy of scale. The government doesn't produce anything. Private and public industry produces the goods. The government, to fulfill your dream would: 1. Have a competitive bid for the meter and strips 2. Would have to have more than one supplier as sole source justification in this case is impossible due to having more than 1 source already. 3. The government would love to sell you these goods. They would, of course, create the infrastructure to do this, which they would add to the price of the goods. My guess, when all said and done, Wal-Mart has already negotiated a better price than the government and used infrastructure in place to deliver it to you. The reason for the $100 toilet seat is that americans have demanded that the government pay $100 for a toilet seat. The government must develop a spec for a toilet seat, have bidders conferences to make the bidding for the next toilet seats fair and equitable. The bid must be adjucated with all preferences given to small and minority owned business. There must be public disclosure to all parties bidding of the final results. Then, there is the cost to administer the post win procurement of the toilet seat. There are inventory and deliver charges into the supply chain as well. The bottom line, Home depot charges you $14 for a $10 toilet seat but due to demands of the public and laws, you pay $100 for the USA seat. Your diabetic supplies, would suffer the same. No free meters, log books, samples. Your basic meter might be $850 but it will be cheap with the strips costing $10 each. Oh, and how would get them? The government would force stores to carry the goods, which the store would be glad to charge you for. Since you alread get them at the store, you might be better off leaving our government out of it. The free enterprize system will work to get you the lowest price (as long as nothing illegal goes on). Heck, it brought you a free meter. The price is in the strips! You still have to pay for what you get, with a profit, or else companies wouldn't produce the products. > It is incomprehensible to me that testing strips should cost as much as > they do. Certainly if the U.S. Government put in the same research > that they have used to send rockets to the moon, they could certainly > manufacture test strips that cost less than $5 per hundred. That's > probably the actual cost of the materials. Unfortunately, we are unable to purchae products for "material costs" only. Labor and overhead must be factored in. As well as, service, supply chain, delivery, etc. With every strip you pay for phone calls to the company, their web site, the recalls, the lawsuits, and yes, the CEO's inflated salary. You pay for tooling, taxes, research, customer service, travel expenses, quality control, compliance with laws and regulations, waste, employee benefits... etc. > By having to re-imburse millions of diabetics for ridiculously > over-priced test strips, the government, and insurance companies, are > wasting billions of dollars. > > This is one way that America could cut back on high medical expenses > without sacrificing quality. Adding bureaucratic overhead will increase cost and, therefore, decrease quality. I share your dissatisfaction with the price of strips. With further development the price will come down. The barometer, well, so far, it looks like WalMart! They have run the price down and I hear that most people are satisfied with the quality. The simple fact is, the insurance company provides very little in the way of healthcare. They are a paperwork service. They take all of the claims, add a fat profit, and send you your bill. No risk, no health service. There is the spot to be eliminated, if possible. Even with that, multiple insurance companies have to compete for business, which usually means that they take your money and deny you services so that they can make more. But, in some sense it is fair and equitable. Just a different way to look at the same problem maybe... -Sax >> It seems to me that an enormous amount of money could be saved on >> Medicare, Medicaid and general insurance costs if the U.S. Government [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >produces the goods. The government, to fulfill your dream would: >1. Have a competitive bid for the meter and strips If you don't believe the drug companies participate in price fixing then you haven't been paying attention. >2. Would have to have more than one supplier as sole source justification in >this case is impossible due to having more than 1 source already. Obviously they would all be required to use one standard strip in all meters. >3. The government would love to sell you these goods. They would, of >course, create the infrastructure to do this, which they would add to the >price of the goods. Only so long as our government is controlled by big businesses such as the drug cartel. <snip> >> By having to re-imburse millions of diabetics for ridiculously >> over-priced test strips, the government, and insurance companies, are [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] >Just a different way to look at the same problem maybe... >-Sax And you just gave several more reasons that we grievously need a good universal health care service in this country that covers everyone from cradle to grave. So long as political candidates are allowed to accept contributions from the drug/insurance coalition there is no chance of ever seeing this. SignatureGrandpa Chuck -ô¿ô- ~ The following information is given with the utmost respect for the armed forces and civilians who have died in the current war in Iraq. According to http://icasualties.org/oif/ The number of Americans killed in Iraq as of Mar. 30, 2006 is 2,326. Americans wounded = more than 16,774 United Kingdom = 103 Other = 105 Iraqi deaths are probably in excess of 100,000. Today, March 31, 2006 It has been 1064 days since Bush declared, "Mission Accomplished in Iraq." Target has meters and strips for the same price as Wal Mart. And the internet has it far cheaper--someone posted this URL elsewhere yesterday, http://www.americandiabeteswholesale.com/-strse-Glucose-Test-Strips/searchpath/4 509a08210a4c854fcf7415/start/25/total/31/Categories.bok which has test stips at $13.49 and $16.45 for 50, quite a bit cheaper than either WalMart or Target. I have no reason to believe that there are not other sources in that range. But the argument that private industry will always be cheaper than government health care totally misses the fact that in the US, 95% of the Medicare budget goes to paying cliams, whereas with private insurance, fully 25-33% goes to paperwork, marketing and other bureaucratic necessities. In fact it has been estimated many times that by eliminating the unnecessary layers of bureaucracy and marketing and paperwork involved with private insurance, all of the US population, including everyone who is not insured today, could be provided with medical care of the same quality people with insurance now get and with no increase in cost. Which is how the rest of the industrialized world does it. Morris > > It seems to me that an enormous amount of money could be saved on > > Medicare, Medicaid and general insurance costs if the U.S. Government [quoted text clipped - 74 lines] > Just a different way to look at the same problem maybe... > -Sax >Target has meters and strips for the same price as Wal Mart. And the >internet has it far cheaper--someone posted this URL elsewhere [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >than either WalMart or Target. I have no reason to believe that there >are not other sources in that range. The $16.50 is for Unicheck which is a generic stick for the One Touch Basic meter. These sticks are of very low quality. Your readings may vary wildly. Suggest you do not use these sticks. I've got insurance. but if I were uninsured and had to choose between the cheapest strips or none--I mght chose the cheapest, even knowing the compromises involved. Morris > I've got insurance. > > but if I were uninsured and had to choose between the cheapest strips > or none--I mght chose the cheapest, even knowing the compromises > involved. Someone once said they look for consistency rather than actual levels. Let's say your A1c's are great, if your daily bg's are consistently a bit higher or a bit lower than other strips then you probably have nothing to worry about. I'd be more worried seeing the strips read all over the place. >I've got insurance. > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >Morris Wrong. Using low quality sticks is as bad as not using any sticks. It is too much of a crap shoot in using low quality sticks. Go to walmart and get their Relion at $42/100, much better. >>I've got insurance. >> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > is too much of a crap shoot in using low quality sticks. Go to > walmart and get their Relion at $42/100, much better. He is talking the cheapest not the lowest quality. >> On 2 Apr 2006 16:03:17 -0700, "morris" ><morrisolder@comcast.net> [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > >He is talking the cheapest not the lowest quality. Well aware of it. But, in this case, cheapest can be quite dangerous to your health if the sticks have erratic results. Cheap is my middle name. Best to get name brand sticks off ebay at a decent price and avoid using these generic unstable sticks. W McKee's posts verify this. At the risk of becoming slightly political, it is also incomprehensible to me why you all have to pay so much for test strips and medication. Here we have to pay for a meter... you can get a good one for less than $100, or maybe even fifty with a rebate, and the testing strips are subsidised by the Government through the Diabetes Association- so much so that we might only pay, say, a few dollars for 50 or 100 strips depending on the packaging. . Here too, they supply free needles to drug addicts, yet for many years they would not do the same for people with diabetes ( my point being that there are things wrong with the way we do things also).Now there are free or subsidised needles for diabetics too. Medication here is also within the reach of all, with most prescriptions being not much over $20 (except for the select non-subsidised ones), with some disadvantaged sectors of the community paying only a few dollars each. After a certain amount of out of pocket expenses for prescriptions they are free for the rest of the year. It is possible to see many doctors here for no cost. The USA is a great country and does many things exceptionally well. I hope at some point that your Government might show some compassion to those with medical needs and subsidise some of these things so that they are within reach of those who are struggling to afford them. Governments of all countries seem to spend huge amounts of dollars on things that the average person might see as unjustifiable.The welfare and well-being of it's Citizens should be their mandate,however. I feel so sorry for everyone there for the huge cost of medication and test supplies; it distresses me greatly to see many people there in need of medication and treatment and unable to afford it.I think it might take a lot of political lobbying to effect change though.I don't know that the insurance companies and pharmaceutical industry would graciously accept such radical reform without a fight. Best Wishes, Craig Type 2 NSW, Australia > It seems to me that an enormous amount of money could be saved on > Medicare, Medicaid and general insurance costs if the U.S. Government [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > This is one way that America could cut back on high medical expenses > without sacrificing quality. >I feel so sorry for everyone there for the huge cost of medication and test >supplies; So do I. But the NDSS was hard won by excellent work many years ago by Diabetes Australia (and other) people lobbying politicians. And that was preceded by the politics of the introduction of Medibank/Medicare/PBS in the '60s and '70s. Some Australians, including I, disagree strongly with the dietary advice given by Diabetes Australia for the treatment of type 2. But I never forget how much we owe the pioneers in that organisation for their effective political work long before I was diagnosed, when I had never heard of DA or NDSS. It will only happen in other countries if those who wish for change learn to understand what needs to be done, politically and administratively, in their own country to achieve their goal. Moaning won't fix it. Political action may. Maybe those interested may profit by suggesting to their politicians that they could benefit by studying our system, despite it's imperfections. It sure isn't perfect - but I'm bloody glad I'm here and not elsewhere. Cheers, Alan, T2, Australia. d&e, metformin 2x500mg SignatureEverything in Moderation - Except Laughter. Hi Alan, I wholeheartedly agree with your weighing of the need for political action to address the situation. On the issue of dietary advice from Diabetes Australia- when I was last at the Dr. he gave me a free DA cookbook. It looked great, glossy, shiny and well bound, but aside from low fat and a few low calorie recipes, many were filled with way too much sugar and carbs for me. Like you though I am certainly grateful for the assistance we receive from the NDSS. You are correct absolutely when you state that "it isn't perfect", but like you I agree that it is so much better than so many other places. Treatment in the US is prohibitive for most without insurance, and sometimes expensive even with it, depending on your co-pay. I had a small skin cancer removed there and it cost a bit over $700 US. Here I had a small one removed and it cost nothing.It would be nice to see treatment for such necessary things freely available worldwide for anyone who requires it.That includes diabtetes supplies. Best wishes, Craig Type 2 NSW, Australia "Alan S" <loralweightandcarbs@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message > >snip< Some Australians, including I, disagree strongly with the > dietary advice given by Diabetes Australia for the treatment [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > Cheers, Alan, T2, Australia. > d&e, metformin 2x500mg > It seems to me that an enormous amount of money could be saved on > Medicare, Medicaid and general insurance costs if the U.S. Government [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > This is one way that America could cut back on high medical expenses > without sacrificing quality. Why stop at bg testing? Let's have gov't designed and manufactured cars like the Soviet Zim, Zis, and Zil. Houses, too, like those gorgeous apartment blocks in Beijing. And newspapers, of course, like Iran. Once the gov't takes over everything, there'll be nothing to complain about and we will all do great works with the time we used to spend bitching on the internet. A workers' paradise, yes indeedy! >> It is incomprehensible to me that testing strips should cost as much >> as they do. Certainly if the U.S. Government put in the same >> research that they have used to send rockets to the moon, they could >> certainly manufacture test strips that cost less than $5 per >> hundred. That's probably the actual cost of the materials. You have *NO* idea what you're talking about. A lot of that expense is the quality control of what is a very hard to control process. Another is all the damned paperwork required by, you guessed it! That government! For straightforward manufacturing jobs like this one, private industry will generally be scads cheaper, and easier to insist on quality from. I want my strips to be accurate! >> By having to re-imburse millions of diabetics for ridiculously >> over-priced test strips, the government, and insurance companies, are >> wasting billions of dollars. Overpriced? Probably, it's a fairly captive market. Ridiculously overpriced? I think not. >> This is one way that America could cut back on high medical expenses >> without sacrificing quality. I'm sorry. Whose budget do you think the strip manufacture will come out of? Would you rather pay 20% more income tax for this and every other basic health care? It ain't cheap! > Why stop at bg testing? Let's have gov't designed and > manufactured cars like the Soviet Zim, Zis, and Zil. Houses, > too, like those gorgeous apartment blocks in Beijing. And > newspapers, of course, like Iran. I'd settle for a basic national health plan with harsh cutoffs for experimental, untested, or cosmetic procedures. Tooth capping? Cosmetic, pay for it yourself or with your own insurance. Quadruple bypass, less than 50% chance of survival? Don't waste the money. Basic dialysis to extend a kidney patient's life for 3 years until a transplant is available? Damn right. And everyone on national health care is expected to donate blood or get a medical waiver, or lose coverage for transplants of any kind. I'm sometimes a harsh little man. > You have *NO* idea what you're talking about. A lot of that expense is the > quality control of what is a very hard to control process. Another is all > the damned paperwork required by, you guessed it! That government! The other thing is when the government defined specification. They mak specify a toilet seat slightly different than the standard. Therefore the bids are higher because the manufacturer has to buy new tooling to produce the seat adding to the cost. On the quality control side we once made a detection tube. The government would buy five. But we needed to make fifty five for all the testing required for the five tubes. Government buying from hasn't changed, to my knowledge,in the last 35 years. >> You have *NO* idea what you're talking about. A lot of that expense >> is the quality control of what is a very hard to control process. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > Government buying from hasn't changed, to my knowledge,in the last 35 > years. And the over-testing is part of why the damn thing may still work after 35 years. I've done a bit of medical electronics design work, and worked with some military research contactors for it. It was interesting to work with them: sharp people, very cautious about robust design and over-specifiying tolerances in order to avoid problems down the road. >> Government buying from hasn't changed, to my knowledge,in the last 35 >> years. > > And the over-testing is part of why the damn thing may still work after 35 > years. I don't think I want my meter lasting 35 years. I'm bound to want a new (& "improved!") gadget before then. If *I* last another 35 years. bj >>> Government buying from hasn't changed, to my knowledge,in the last 35 >>> years. >> And the over-testing is part of why the damn thing may still work after 35 >> years. >I don't think I want my meter lasting 35 years. I'm bound to want a new (& >"improved!") gadget before then. If *I* last another 35 years. >bj Who is going to do the development of the improved gadget if the government specifies? I started on the old strips which took more blood and were read by looking at the color; not much accuracy, lots of time, lots of blood needed. Most of the present meters now do not work by color, but by electric conductivity. There are different types in development; the present ones work by using a precisely set amount of an enzyme to interact with glucose to produce hydrogen peroxide, which then changest the conductivity; glucose is not very reactive without enzymes to break it down. SignatureThis address is for information only. I do not claim that these views are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University. Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University hrubin@stat.purdue.edu Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558 >>>> Government buying from hasn't changed, to my knowledge,in the last >>>> 35 years. [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > which then changest the conductivity; glucose is not very > reactive without enzymes to break it down. Heh. Yeah, there's an old theory that if the US government haad pursued a cure for polio in dedicated, we'd have wound up with the world's most sophisticated, steam-powered iron lung. Actually, the U.S. government has done some extraordinarily complicated things: Getting astronauts to the moon and back, inventing the A-bomb, winning World Wars I and II (against enemies who now make better cars than us), inventing satellites and satellite communications, GPS, hurricane path forecasting, even inventing the Internet (originally the Arpanet). The stereotypical idea that the government is all a bunch of bumbling fools is not borne out by fact. But I think that a standardized test-strip and tester would be a very cost-effective item for the government to produce (in conjunction with private industry). A test strip is not a car. Compared to an Intel chip, which has millions of transistors on it, a test strip is absurdly lo-tech. It is a simple one-function creature which could be distributed to millions of people. The economy of scale would drive price down. Most importantly, the government would be SAVING huge amounts of money by not having to reimburse so much money to big drug companies. As would diabetics, who would also be saving a significant amount of money both directly and indirectly. The low cost of government-produced test-strips would drive down the price of private test-strips. The presence of the government getting in on one of Big Pharm's cash cows should be enough to scare the living shirt out of them and cause them to reduce their prices to realistic levels. > Actually, the U.S. government has done some extraordinarily complicated > things: Getting astronauts to the moon and back, inventing the A-bomb, > winning World Wars I and II (against enemies who now make better cars > than us), inventing satellites and satellite communications, GPS, > hurricane path forecasting, even inventing the Internet (originally the > Arpanet). Well, Sputnik and the work at Peenemunde and all that stuff are very impressive, but we here in Florida want to know, when is this hurricane path forecasting stuff gonna be released?????? >Actually, the U.S. government has done some extraordinarily complicated >things: Getting astronauts to the moon and back, This might look complicated, but it could have been done almost 80 years ago, before television and computers had been invented; it was an engineering, not science, problem. inventing the A-bomb, Putting lots of the world's best mathematicians and physicists on the engineering problem with unlimited resources and a proof of concept already. >winning World Wars I and II (against enemies who now make better cars >than us), Do they? They have better workmanship, but not better engineering. Whose military vehicles are we using? inventing satellites and satellite communications, GPS, >hurricane path forecasting, even inventing the Internet (originally the >Arpanet). Satellites and satellite communications were described before the government got into it; if the government had not monopolized space activities, it might have even been done earlier. GPS was also predicted earlier, and the forecasting of hurricane paths becomes easy with enough information, which is STILL not available. Before Arpanet, there as UUCP, BITNET, CSNET, and several others. It was not invented, but copied, and funds made available and organized. >The stereotypical idea that the government is all a bunch of bumbling >fools is not borne out by fact. >But I think that a standardized test-strip and tester would be a very >cost-effective item for the government to produce (in conjunction with >private industry). >A test strip is not a car. Compared to an Intel chip, which has >millions of transistors on it, a test strip is absurdly lo-tech. It is >a simple one-function creature which could be distributed to millions >of people. The economy of scale would drive price down. Transistors are cheap, and as many as are needed are put in the meter. The problem is to make a strip with a carefully controlled input channel, and a carefully controlled amount of chemical reactants, which I believe are derived from a fungus, so the chemical needs to be carefully purified and the concentration controlled, which drives a glucose-moderated production of hydrogen peroxide, which then causes color to change or electrical conductivity to change. The control here has to be far more accurate than in the production of drugs of most kinds. Otherwise, we would be in the stage of reading the color change in strips after several minutes, after a lot of blood, and not being more accurate than 20%. This is what would have happened if the government had taken over 20 years ago. That far in the future, we will have far better testing equipment. There are far too many occasions when I cannot use the reasonably good one I have. >Most importantly, the government would be SAVING huge amounts of money >by not having to reimburse so much money to big drug companies. As >would diabetics, who would also be saving a significant amount of money >both directly and indirectly. The low cost of government-produced >test-strips would drive down the price of private test-strips. Before they were stopped, a company produced generic test strips for some machines at about 2/3 the price. >The presence of the government getting in on one of Big Pharm's cash >cows should be enough to scare the living shirt out of them and cause >them to reduce their prices to realistic levels. SignatureThis address is for information only. I do not claim that these views are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University. Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University hrubin@stat.purdue.edu Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558 > hrubin@stat.purdue.edu Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558 Hi, Maybe you can explain to me the standard deviation on test strips. Is it a standard deviation of about 5%? Does it follow a bell curve? I've taken a couple statistics courses, but I don't understand the information on the packaging of either of my meters/test strips (Reli-on and Freestyle). I think that Reli-on says that for mid-low (around 100) there is an SD of about 3. What does that mean? >> hrubin@stat.purdue.edu Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558 >Hi, >Maybe you can explain to me the standard deviation on test strips. Is >it a standard deviation of about 5%? Does it follow a bell curve? >I've taken a couple statistics courses, but I don't understand the >information on the packaging of either of my meters/test strips >(Reli-on and Freestyle). >I think that Reli-on says that for mid-low (around 100) there is an SD >of about 3. What does that mean? This means that if you take a large sample of test strips, the average of the squares of the deviations from the average will be around 9. This is not likely to be of much use, but if the distribution is approximately normal, about 2/3 of the strips will be within 3 of what the average strip would report, and 95% would be within 6. SignatureThis address is for information only. I do not claim that these views are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University. Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University hrubin@stat.purdue.edu Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558 >Actually, the U.S. government has done some extraordinarily complicated >things: Getting astronauts to the moon and back, inventing the A-bomb, >winning World Wars I and II (against enemies who now make better cars >than us), inventing satellites and satellite communications, GPS, >hurricane path forecasting, even inventing the Internet (originally the >Arpanet). We need to remember that a lot of the science of today originated in Germany. I worked with many over the years ______that we grabbed at the end of WW2, They lost the war because of a bunch arrogant idiots managed to get control of Germany. They almost succeeded in taking over all of us. The allies lagged in most areas but the USA mass production saved us. Also a lot of cannon fodder kids. But our greed causes the lessons that were very clear then to be lost.In my lifetime We have regressed to greed. and lost the concept that collective efforts are superior if used properly. I followed our efforts to get anything into space and a few Ex German scientists did the job easily when "our people" . failed many times. Nothing like knowing what you are doing. In my paranoid old age I wonder if we have a similar case in Medical science. To many nonproductive "talkers" running the show. Easier to "con" than to produce >> It seems to me that an enormous amount of money could be saved on >> Medicare, Medicaid and general insurance costs if the U.S. Government [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >> manufacture test strips that cost less than $5 per hundred. That's >> probably the actual cost of the materials. There's a lot more to test strips than the materials. Like quality control, testing, and calibration. And recordkeeping in case a recall of particular batches is needed. Do you have any idea how difficult it is to make test strips that read 10% higher for veterans, minorities, and people out of work due to hurricanes Katrina or Rita? I'm sure Congress would insist on that. If the government ran it, sex would HAVE to be mandatory, since they'd manage to screw it up so bad nobody would do it willingly. Gordon L. Burditt I agree. Just look at the "black market" of test strips that are sold on eBay by people who aren't using them. They sell them to Medicare/Medicaid dealers, which just buy them below wholesale price on eBay, and then they go re-sell them at higher than retail prices again to the same people who sell them back to the Medicare/Medicaid dealers again! It's a vicious cycle -- the losers are the taxpayers and us, because test strip prices stay at ~80 cents/test. >I agree. Just look at the "black market" of test strips that are sold >on eBay by people who aren't using them. They sell them to [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >again! It's a vicious cycle -- the losers are the taxpayers and us, >because test strip prices stay at ~80 cents/test. I've been buying sticks on ebay for almost three years. A good percentage of the sticks I buy are there since someone changes meters or a family member died. Some are there due to produce close outs, like the old Walmart Relion. Some guy moved tens of thousands of them. Who are these Medicare/Medicaid dealers? Stick prices are high due to the fact that the stick manufacturers like Roche and Lifescan have a commanding percentage of the market. In fact, they control the market. This gives them clout and the ability to constantly push through price hikes. Prices of Roche and Lifescan products at Walmart now are at $90 per 100 sticks. Outdated technology like the sticks for the One Touch Basic meter cost $90 and change, while sticks for the One Touch Ultra cost $89 and change. The OTB is a whole blood meter while the OTU is plasma calibrated. But, there is a demand for the OTB so that Lifescan priced the sticks slightly higher than the newer and better OTU sticks. It is called law of supply and demand in a market driven economy. Companies charge whatever the market will bear. I saw an ad in "Diabetes Health" for a product that I *think* was called Prodigy. The ad said that 100 test strips (0.5 microliter) cost $19.95. My jaw about dropped. I'm hoping we hear more about this. It's irritating when I see 100 Freestyle strips for $87 in one store and find Walgreens charging $98 for the same thing. Frustrating! Yes, I saw those Relion strips being sold on eBay...I thought that was crazy how many he was moving through! To identify the Medicare dealers, look at the feedback of people bidding on them. If they're buying thousands of different brand strips per month, that's a strong indicator. I'm not going to point at any specific people because perhaps they have a test strip fetish of some sort, but others know of their presence when you see an ad stating, "NO DEALERS!" I imagine others are buying up lower-than-wholesale items for their corner pharmacies, too. There are the occassional "resellers" too -- one always has "PRAY FOR A CURE" in her ads -- I've seen her buy low and sell high on eBay (perhaps her marketing is better and it's a small time money making hobby). >I saw an ad in "Diabetes Health" for a product that I *think* was >called Prodigy. The ad said that 100 test strips (0.5 microliter) cost >$19.95. My jaw about dropped. I'm hoping we hear more about this. I googled for prodigy glucose and found it on http://www.diabetesmonitor.com/meters.htm # Diabetes Support Program in Wellington, Florida, at (800) 799-1477, has just introduced a new talking blood glucose meter called the Prodigy. It not only talks but uses only 0.6 microliters of blood and tells your results in seven seconds. According to President Frank P. Suess, the company gives away the meter to people with diabetes. Taidoc Technology Corporation in San Chung, Taipei, manufactures the meter and in August 2005 obtained FDA 510(k) clearance to market it in the United States. Taidoc private labels the Prodigy for Diabetes Support Program, which has exclusive rights to sell it in the United States. The URL is http://www.diagnosticdevicesinc.com/ Added April 22, 2005: >It's irritating when I see 100 Freestyle strips for $87 in one store >and find Walgreens charging $98 for the same thing. Frustrating! > >Yes, I saw those Relion strips being sold on eBay...I thought that was >crazy how many he was moving through! I bought one for for someone - $9 for 600 sticks. My box cost $45. Sure came in handy. One hell of a deal. >To identify the Medicare dealers, look at the feedback of people >bidding on them. If they're buying thousands of different brand strips Sellers come and go like the wind. >per month, that's a strong indicator. I'm not going to point at any >specific people because perhaps they have a test strip fetish of some [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >(perhaps her marketing is better and it's a small time money making >hobby). All sticks on ebay are now selling - high. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.