[lucb1e]

> Natera recently brought to market a non-invasive pre-natal test that can detect Down syndrome and other conditions in a mother’s blood. Previously, testing for these conditions required a risky procedure that extracted tissue from the fetus. Other non-invasive tests aren’t as comprehensive.

> Because Natera's test is better than its competitors' products, the company charges more.

> “Premium pricing communicates a premium product,” says Matthew Rabinowitz, the company’s CEO.

Is this normal in the USA? Talking of "premium offerings" in the context of healthcare seems sickening to me. Premium hospital beds with high speed broadband, alrighty, but premium healthcare itself? I understand that one needs to recoup R&D costs a few times over for it to be worth the risk, but that's simply cost price (risk * R&D cost / unit count * unit cost) and not a "premium product". This isn't a non-essential premium Ferrari, it could help a lot of people. Is it just me who finds this a really weird example?

[lotsofpulp]

>I understand that one needs to recoup R&D costs a few times over for it to be worth the risk, but that's simply cost price (risk * R&D cost / unit count * unit cost) and not a "premium product".

How are you going to attract top minds to do the R&D without paying them a premium? And investors need a premium to incentivize investing R&D, especially in the low probability of success field of biotech.

I don't agree with the way their CEO characterized it. He probably should have just said the pricing is commensurate with the costs involved in developing it or something, which include the opportunity cost of not using the funds to buy tech stocks.

[maxwell]

> Natera

https://www.bbb.org/us/ca/san-carlos/profile/laboratory-rese...

https://community.whattoexpect.com/forums/december-2018-babi...

https://www.fastcompany.com/3059072/why-patients-are-getting...

https://www.reddit.com/r/BabyBumps/comments/aa0jqk/watch_out...

https://www.reuters.com/article/health-natera/natera-settles...

[ryeights]

That stuck out to me as well, but it makes sense as an incentive for companies to create better products. Why pour money into R&D to develop new products if you're restricted to charging existing prices? Might as well just develop the existing product and save on the R&D costs.

[freepor]

Bounties are a good way to solve this. Invent a new therapy? The government buys your patent for a sum proportional to the value created (not to the dollars invested) and releases it to the public domain.

[redis_mlc]

> Is this normal in the USA? Talking of "premium offerings" in the context of healthcare seems sickening to me.

The whole US healthcare system is sickening.

Just related to corona:

1) ventilators have been used not to help patients, but to protect staff from aerosolization. The problem is that intubating and drugging somebody causes serious health problems in itself.

2) various hospitals and doctors are adding corona as a cause or factor to increase billings, whether it's related to corona or not.

[IAmGraydon]

What solution do you propose? Regulated pricing? That would remove the incentive, which would lead to far less innovation. It’s better to have these innovations at a high price than not at all.