In June of 2017, 26-year-old Alec Raeshawn Smith died on the floor of his apartment from diabetic ketoacidosis, a condition where, without insulin, the blood turns acidic and causes organ failure. His mother, Nicole Smith-Holt, found his body next to an empty vial of insulin. Just two months previously, Antroinette Worsham found her 22-year-old daughter, Antavia, under similar circumstances—dead and out of insulin.

Skyrocketing prices have led 1 in 4 insulin-dependent individuals to ration an essential medication, without a doctor’s supervision or approval, often with serious, and sometimes fatal complications. In reaction, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) will hold a May 13 public hearing on the production of biosimilar insulins, the latest attempt by the federal government to explore ways to lower insulin costs.

Lawmakers have floated other measures to reduce the cost of drugs to consumers, such as capping U.S. list prices at the median in other developed nations, authorizing Medicare to directly negotiate drug prices, and allowing the personal importation of prescription drugs from Canada. The pharmaceutical industry has invariably responded to these proposals by blaming high costs on “middlemen” who don’t pass rebates to patients and by doubling down on the “innovation” myth—the unproven notion that high list prices are necessary to fund tomorrow’s breakthroughs.

For instance, at an April House Energy and Commerce Committee hearing on insulin prices, a representative of Sanofi, a French multinational pharmaceutical company, began her testimony with an anecdote about how Sanofi’s PCSK9 inhibitors (the latest generation of cholesterol drugs) saved the lives of her husband and 7-year-old son, both of whom have a genetic disorder called Familial Hypercholesterolemia (FH). In doing so, she inferred that the steep price of insulin and other drugs is necessary to advance medicine and protect future generations.

The trouble is Sanofi didn’t identify the PCSK9 gene or link this protein-regulating gene to FH. Nor did the company have the idea to develop PCSK9 inhibitors to reduce the risk of cardiac events in those with this condition. Researchers at public hospitals and universities around the world collaborated on these tasks. Realizing the potential for profit, the drugmaker shepherded the therapy through later stage trials and FDA approval. Until very recently, Sanofi’s PCSK9 inhibitor, Praluent, retailed at $14,000 per year and was not always covered by insurance. Like insulin, the drug was priced out of many patients’ reach.