Vet medicine costs rip off!!

rustyboy21

Energize wrote: »

This is why dispensing practices are bad. It creates a conflict of interest where the vet is encouraged to prescribe more drugs because it makes the practice so much money or charge for a prescription to make more money. Doctors for example do not charge for prescriptions.

You have got to be joking aren't you? The cash register starts clicking away, as soon as you step foot into a doctors waiting room. They get paid for seeing you, paid for prescribing to you, paid for getting the nurse to see you over weight issues/diabetes etc. They get paid for signing a death certificate, they get paid for lots of things. It is just that you don't see it, it all comes out of central funds. It is exactly the same with dentists, they get paid by the NHS for everything they do whilst you are in that chair.
Vets are private businesses, so they have to show their charges, like private hospitals. I had double cataract surgery early this year and went private through Axa PPP. I got copies of all the bills. I was in my private room for 2 1/2 hours, the bill come to £995 for the room, each swab was charged, the staffing was charged separately, the consultants fees, the anaesthetist charges etc. It came out at £2500 per eye. It si only the same as a vet, same as a private doctor would be.

Energize

rustyboy21 wrote: »

You spout off about the pricing of tablets available online or with a private prescription. How do you get the private prescription? You say from the pharmacy. How does the pharmacist know what is wrong?
.

Private prescription comes from the doctor.

rustyboy21 wrote: »

If you charged more for consultations, then people would be put off taking their sick animals to the vet, ending with unnecessary harm to the poor animal. It would not work.
You don't seem to be refuting the fact that vets have to equip their practices with machines etc which cost a fortune and they do not get any subsidy what so ever from any organisation. So where do they get the money to pay for it? You seem to think that they should just pay for it, not pass on the costs and be happy that they have patients coming to see them.

If you charge more for medication then you put people off buying it, a lot of people simply can't afford the price the vets charge.

Swings and roundabouts.

I have no idea where you get the idea I think costs shouldn't be passed on, I said they should cover the costs in the treatment and consultation, not massive mark ups on medication, that's very bad business practice, every area of a business needs to pay for itself, subsiding one area of a business from another is poor practice.

rustyboy21 wrote: »

Again, why should they do it for free. The issue I have is that you are carrying on about the prices for certain tablets. Yes they are cheaper, but a pharmacy will get them a hell of a lot cheaper than a vet would, they are buying in bulk, have rebates from the drug makers, special pricing etc. A vet may order 6 bottles of metacam every 2 weeks. A pharmacy wholesaler, who also sells online will buy 2 pallets a week. Your comparisons are wrong.
.

The consultation fee should cover the 10 seconds it takes to write a prescription, just as it does in private healthcare.

And as I said previously pharmacies don't get that much more of a discount, generic drugs are very low profit margin for the manufacturer, there's no extra discounts to give.

rustyboy21 wrote: »

You have got to be joking aren't you? The cash register starts clicking away, as soon as you step foot into a doctors waiting room. They get paid for seeing you, paid for prescribing to you, paid for getting the nurse to see you over weight issues/diabetes etc. They get paid for signing a death certificate, they get paid for lots of things. It is just that you don't see it, it all comes out of central funds. It is exactly the same with dentists, they get paid by the NHS for everything they do whilst you are in that chair.
Vets are private businesses, so they have to show their charges, like private hospitals. I had double cataract surgery early this year and went private through Axa PPP. I got copies of all the bills. I was in my private room for 2 1/2 hours, the bill come to £995 for the room, each swab was charged, the staffing was charged separately, the consultants fees, the anaesthetist charges etc. It came out at £2500 per eye. It si only the same as a vet, same as a private doctor would be.

I use private healthcare, I pay a consultation fee and that's it. No prescription charge, so vets shouldn't charge one either. It's a conflict of interest for practices to dispense medication as I said, studies show it consistently results in extra medication being prescribed, costing the patients more.

I have no idea why you are bringing up treatment costs in a discussion of prescription medication prices, it's completely irrelevant.

albacookie

Energize wrote: »

every area of a business needs to pay for itself, subsiding one area of a business from another is poor practice.


generic drugs are very low profit margin for the manufacturer,

Surely if mark ups on medication shouldn't be used to cross subsidise consultations and other treatments then consultation fees shouldn't be used to subsidise prescriptions?

Vets aren't allowed to prescribe generic drugs - the prescribing cascade has to be followed which says that the first choice should be a medication licensed for that condition in that species. If one doesn't exist there are several more steps to follow before getting to the stage where generics are allowed.

rustyboy21

Energize wrote: »

I use private healthcare, I pay a consultation fee and that's it. No prescription charge, so vets shouldn't charge one either. It's a conflict of interest for practices to dispense medication as I said, studies show it consistently results in extra medication being prescribed, costing the patients more.

I have no idea why you are bringing up treatment costs in a discussion of prescription medication prices, it's completely irrelevant.

It is all well and good that you can afford to pay for Private healthcare, I have it with my job, which is taxable off my wages. It does not cover me for normal GP consultations, I would have to pay £150 for a consultation with a Private Doctor.


But in saying what you have , re Private doctors just would not work in the Vet sector. How many people would pay such high costs for consultations. People have the choice of going Private or through the NHS for their own healthcare ( as long as you are paying through your wages or benefits into the system) You do not have that ability with Animals. It is either see a Vet and pay for the service, or let your animal die. Vets will have to keep the consultation charges low enough, as not to put off people getting their animals seen , so therefore all the capital outlay they have invested in their practice needs to be recouped in another way. This is by charging for a prescription if the owner is buying elsewhere, or a higher price for the drugs if they are supplying, but no charge for the prescription.


I don't know what it is, but you seem to have a slightly warped viewpoint on this issue. You seem to have the money to be able to utilise the Private health sector, so have no issue on paying their absurd fees, but think that animal drugs are Ridiculous prices and think that raising the price of the consultation with the vet will make it fairer. What you don't take into account, is that a good majority of people who own a pet, who love their pets, maybe more than humans, are elderly, have a restricted income, would go without food to get their animals well again and if this means that the consultation fee is lower, but the price of the drug is slightly higher, but at least the pet is seen and helped.
Just to let you know, in case you are not an animal owner, You do not pay for the prescription, if you buy the drugs from the vet.


What is better a charge of £150 and free prescription and lower drug price, or £30 , no prescription charge and £30 on drugs?


You do the Maths.

DKLS

rustyboy21 wrote: »

Most people try and stay away from vets, as it upsets the animals going. You try and only go , when there is an issue. The vet has a debt around his/her neck from training/education of maybe £40k+ , then the costs of opening the practice. The cost of staff, insurance, registration, equipment, property management etc. They have to factor all of this in to their pricing.

Try nearer to 80-100k of debt by the time your qualified, chuck in the significant dangers of working with large animals and the actual stressful reality of being a vet where you know you have the skills to treat an animal yet the owner cannot afford the treatment so they spend a large amount of time putting animals to sleep which isn't the reason why people go into the vet industry.

I did a project with a vet who was building his own surgery, he had invested 2 million of his own money and borrowed another 4 to build a joint small and large animal practice, fit it out with all the relevant kit, hire and pay staff its a huge investment.

The price of kit isn't dissimilar to the cost of human kit, prices of 50-500 K for a bit of kit with a lifespan of 5-6 years isn't unknown but hey all vets are greedy immoral swines aren't they ?

Shoshannah

Energize wrote: »

The medications he is prescribed are actually very cheap.

The net cost of frusemide is about 80p for 28 tablets. So a pharmacy would charge about £3.50 for a private prescription.

Yeah, frusemide is cheap as chips.

What about pimobendan? Is this drug even used in human medicine? I don't know.

Shoshannah

Energize wrote: »

Private prescription comes from the doctor.

If you charge more for medication then you put people off buying it, a lot of people simply can't afford the price the vets charge.

Swings and roundabouts.

I have no idea where you get the idea I think costs shouldn't be passed on, I said they should cover the costs in the treatment and consultation, not massive mark ups on medication, that's very bad business practice, every area of a business needs to pay for itself, subsiding one area of a business from another is poor practice.

The consultation fee should cover the 10 seconds it takes to write a prescription, just as it does in private healthcare.

And as I said previously pharmacies don't get that much more of a discount, generic drugs are very low profit margin for the manufacturer, there's no extra discounts to give.

I use private healthcare, I pay a consultation fee and that's it. No prescription charge, so vets shouldn't charge one either. It's a conflict of interest for practices to dispense medication as I said, studies show it consistently results in extra medication being prescribed, costing the patients more.

I have no idea why you are bringing up treatment costs in a discussion of prescription medication prices, it's completely irrelevant.

May I ask, have you knowledge of the inner workings of a veterinary practice? I wonder where you are getting your information from.

Oh it takes me longer than ten seconds to write a prescription.

Energize

albacookie wrote: »

Vets aren't allowed to prescribe generic drugs - the prescribing cascade has to be followed which says that the first choice should be a medication licensed for that condition in that species. If one doesn't exist there are several more steps to follow before getting to the stage where generics are allowed.

I don't think you understand what a generic is, it is an unbranded form of a medication, it's still the same medication.

rustyboy21 wrote: »

I don't know what it is, but you seem to have a slightly warped viewpoint on this issue. You seem to have the money to be able to utilise the Private health sector, so have no issue on paying their absurd fees, but think that animal drugs are Ridiculous prices and think that raising the price of the consultation with the vet will make it fairer. What you don't take into account, is that a good majority of people who own a pet, who love their pets, maybe more than humans, are elderly, have a restricted income, would go without food to get their animals well again and if this means that the consultation fee is lower, but the price of the drug is slightly higher, but at least the pet is seen and helped.
Just to let you know, in case you are not an animal owner, You do not pay for the prescription, if you buy the drugs from the vet.


What is better a charge of £150 and free prescription and lower drug price, or £30 , no prescription charge and £30 on drugs?


You do the Maths.

That maths doesn't make sense, the overall cost would be the same to the patient if it were priced correctly. Maybe even less because the vets would have greater revenue.

Shoshannah wrote: »

Yeah, frusemide is cheap as chips.

What about pimobendan? Is this drug even used in human medicine? I don't know.

Yes it is used in human medicine in some countries, I don't have the pricing for it, but it was synthesised a long time ago so is presumably off patent.

Shoshannah

Energize wrote: »

I don't think you understand what a generic is, it is an unbranded form of a medication, it's still the same medication.

I'm afraid you don't understand the prescribing cascade.

Where a branded veterinary version exists, vets are required BY LAW to prescribe that first, even if there is a cheaper unbranded version in existence. If you go 'off licence', you must be prepared to justify your actions.

It's crazy, I know. But that is the case in the UK at this time.

albacookie

Energize wrote: »

I don't think you understand what a generic is, it is an unbranded form of a medication, it's still the same medication.

Yes, I understand that fine. They're not allowed to be used in animals if a branded version exists.

In several cases vets have used the generic for years then the drug companies have put a branded version in a fancy box and charged 10 times more for it - we then have no option but to use it - for example cimetidine now sold as Zitac or spironolactone now sold as Prilactone. Selling the generic version rather than the branded one now would be breaking the law. Stupid but true.