The Real Reason Medicine Is Unaffordable in America

SUMMARY

Joe Brown, a former stock broker and financial educator, examines the systemic causes behind the high cost of medicine in the United States. He attributes unaffordable drug prices to regulatory barriers, intellectual property laws, and lobbying, arguing that these factors limit competition and keep prices artificially high.

MAIN POINTS

• Insulin prices have risen far beyond inflation due to a lack of competition, with three companies controlling nearly the entire global market. [1:00]
• FDA regulations create high barriers to entry, making it extremely costly and time-consuming for new drugs to reach the market, which protects existing monopolies. [3:00]
• Intellectual property laws grant pharmaceutical companies monopolies over drugs, even when research is publicly funded, preventing competition and keeping prices high. [6:01]
• Lobbying by pharmaceutical companies ensures that government policies continue to protect their monopolies and maintain high drug prices. [9:01]
• Pharmacy benefit managers and middlemen further inflate drug prices by taking a significant share of spending, while legal and regulatory constraints prevent market-driven price reductions. [13:00]
• Alternatives such as cash-pay healthcare and gray market medications offer ways to escape the traditional system, and widespread adoption could eventually force systemic change. [16:01]

DETAILED ANALYSIS

The cost of medicine in the United States is disproportionately high, with examples such as insulin costing $3 to manufacture but selling for $300 per vial. This phenomenon is not recent; it is rooted in a complex system that restricts competition and enables monopolistic pricing. The lack of competition is stark, with three companies controlling 99% of the global insulin market, leading to widespread rationing among American patients who cannot afford the necessary doses.

This trend is not limited to insulin; drugs like semaglutide (Ozempic, Wegovy) and tirzepatide (Mounjaro) are sold in the U.S. at prices many times higher than in other developed countries, sometimes reaching over $1,000 per month compared to under $100 abroad. The existence of gray and black markets, where these drugs can be obtained for a fraction of the U.S. price, demonstrates that high prices are not due to manufacturing costs but rather to artificial constraints on competition.

The first major barrier is the regulatory environment, particularly the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). While intended to ensure drug safety, the FDA's approval process imposes enormous costs—over $4 million just to file a new drug application, and up to $2.5 billion and 10-15 years to bring a drug to market. These regulatory costs are not related to actual research or production but are imposed by government policy, effectively excluding smaller competitors and ensuring only large pharmaceutical firms can navigate the process.

This creates a protected environment for incumbents and stifles innovation from smaller entities.

Intellectual property laws, especially patents, further entrench monopolies. Although patents are theoretically designed to incentivize innovation, in practice they prevent others from producing or selling even well-understood and easily manufactured drugs. This is particularly problematic when much of the foundational research is publicly funded.

A study of FDA-approved drugs from 2010 to 2019 found that the National Institutes of Health (NIH) contributed to the research behind every drug, with over $230 billion in taxpayer funding. Despite this, universities patent the discoveries and license them to pharmaceutical companies, which then gain exclusive rights to sell the drugs at whatever price they choose, regardless of the public's investment in their development.

Lobbying is the third pillar maintaining high drug prices. Pharmaceutical companies are among the largest spenders on federal lobbying, outpacing industries like oil, gas, and defense. In 2025, lobbying expenditures reached record highs, with Big Pharma spending tens of millions to influence policy and ensure the continuation of their monopolistic advantages.

This lobbying ensures that regulatory and legal frameworks remain favorable to incumbents, perpetuating the cycle of high prices and limited access.

Middlemen, such as pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs), also contribute to inflated costs. PBMs, often owned by major insurance companies, negotiate rebates with manufacturers and retain a significant portion of the money spent on drugs. Analysis shows that 41% of every dollar spent on medication does not reach the manufacturer, with PBMs and pharmacies capturing much of the remainder.

The rebate system incentivizes higher list prices, as PBMs profit from the spread, further driving up costs for consumers.

The cumulative effect of these factors is a system where government intervention, rather than protecting consumers, serves to entrench monopolies and drive up prices. In contrast, sectors with minimal government involvement, such as electronics, have seen prices fall and quality improve due to competition. Over-the-counter drugs, which are not subject to the same regulatory and patent constraints, are widely available, safe, and inexpensive.

The video suggests that alternatives exist, such as cash-pay healthcare and sourcing medications from gray markets, and that widespread adoption of these alternatives could eventually undermine the current system. Ultimately, the argument is that reducing government intervention and allowing free market competition would lead to lower prices and better outcomes for consumers.

LINKS

• Free newsletter from Heresy Financial
• Portfolio stress test and free custom blueprint
• Heresy Financial on X (Twitter)
• Heresy Financial on Instagram
• Heresy Financial on TikTok
• Heresy Financial on Reddit
• Heresy Financial on Rumble

KEYWORDS