Price ceilings on prescription drugs

I was reading an article about how in the Philippines the government is thinking of enacting a price ceiling on prescription drugs. The article I read stated that The Department of Health was expected to set price ceilings on essential medicines. This would give the President the power to set the maximum retail price for certain medicines upon the Department of Health’s recommendation. Some of the medicines that would be included in the price ceiling are: medicines used for the treatment of chronic illnesses and life threatening conditions such as insulin and chemotherapy drugs, medicines used for the prevention of diseases such as vaccines, and medicines used for the prevention of pregnancy.
I know that when we talked about price ceilings in class we said that a price ceiling artificially keeps prices from rising too high, which in theory allows consumers to afford the product or service. But, when a price ceiling is imposed upon a market below the equilibrium quantity and price, it can drive suppliers out of the market, which reduces the supplied resource. It also drives up the consumer demand. When the demand increases beyond the ability to supply, a shortage occurs. In a shortage, some consumers could experience longer lines for the product or no available products when they need or desire to purchase. So I thought, what could be the negative consequences to this new price ceiling in the Philippines?
Some of the consequences could be that there would be a delay of prescription drugs to the people that need them. Also there would be a major decline in the field of new drug innovations. This would occur because most major drug companies incur massive amounts of research and development costs when attempting to introduce a new drug to the market. So, the prescription drug industry relies on the high prices in the market to finance these development costs. If the Philippines were to adopt price controls, the drug companies would be forced to accept lower revenues for drugs that reach the market. As a result, they would no longer be able to cover the costs of developing and bringing to market new drugs. So there would be no incentive to develop new drugs to fight diseases.
Another consequence of price ceilings is it could increase the consumers’ cost. With a price ceiling, there may be a shortage; consumers cannot get as much of the product as they want. Shortages are the inability of a consumer to buy a product although they have the money on hand. People are willing to pay a higher cost to get the goods, or in this case the medicine, that they need. Just because people can’t legally pay a higher amount in dollars doesn’t mean they won’t pay it in other ways. For example, one way consumers compete during shortages is on the basis of first-come, first-served. So, with a price ceiling, people spend more time waiting in line. The higher amount consumers pay, in terms of time wasted waiting in line, does nothing to communicate to suppliers that more should be made available. Any shortage would be eliminated by the price generated by market communication, so shortages are often created by government restrictions on market prices.
A third consequence is reduced quality. While suppliers cannot legally benefit from the excess demand by raising the price, they can reduce the quality of the product, which reduces their costs. Overall many consumers may be harmed by price ceilings, since; price ceilings prevent consumers from communicating with suppliers in ways that motivate the best possible response to their demands.
What do you think?