Dems lay the groundwork to strike a serious blow to one of their own utopias

[ayabe]

Originally posted by: MooseNSquirrel

Originally posted by: Brainonska511

Originally posted by: frostedflakes
Big pharma is still one of the most profitable businesses in the country. Even with generics, there is plenty of incentive for them to innovate.

That's because drug companies can make a lot of money to cover research expenses when their drugs are still under patent.

It takes a long time to research drugs; when you come up with some chemical that does what you want, you usually patent it then, or at least start the process to lock in your claim. But as soon as the patent is approved, the clock starts ticking and you still have years before you even have something close to market. Refining, testing, further refining, clinical trials, FDA approval. In the end, you might only have 5-7 years to recoup your research costs and start dumping money towards more research.

Additionally, a lot of research will hit dead-ends and you'll need to start with fresh approaches (square 1).

I'm not saying they aren't making a lot of money, but some of the smaller companies have been going under because they hit those road blocks and had nothing else in the pipeline. Larger companies, like Pfizer, have been laying off chemists in the last few years because those research pipes have dried up (for the most part) and they are trying to slim down as well or risk going under when their big drugs, like Lipitor, come off patent and the flow of money slows considerably.

My point: if you make the patent periods shorter, there will be less incentive to throw as much money at certain issues, because you won't have the time at the end to recoup all that research cost.

Want more momey for R&D?

Eliminate direct to consumer advertising of medications.

Oh and the industry spends 61 000$ per doctor promoting their wares.

Thats a lot of education about pills.

S&M

Lot of money spent on expensive dinners and various schwag that they hand out to grease the wheels of medicine.

It's pretty bad all over, even in Animal Hospitals - my GF is a vet and she's constantly trying to be "enticed" into prescribing various medications by these pharma salespeople.

 

[Bitek]

The OP is blasting Obama bc he isn't protectionist and self-serving? So he should be more like the Reps when they passed the Medicare Part D bill and ban cost-saving measures to help companies at the expense of consumers and taxpayers?... Yeah, what a dick.

1st off, there are plenty of generic manufacturing going on in the US, labor costs are not that big of a expense compared to regulatory and compliance as well as infrastructure overhead. And its done in these blue states as well. Often just down the street from the Big Guys.

2nd of all, there have been big compliance and safety issues with some of the overseas manufacturing. Heparin made in China for Baxter in 2008 is just one example. Drugs can be made a bit more cheaply over there, but then the regulatory hurdles are higher and bc of all the problems and lack of strong oversight, the FDA plans to more strongly inspect overseas manufacturers, and watch these costs to companies go way up.

Alot of companies are deciding that the small savings are not worth the add't trouble and potential liability if they want access to the US market (largest in world) and are mvoing some operations back to the US where they have more control over the process.

Additionally, companies are well practiced at using tricks to extend patents. "Life-cycle Management" as they say. Reformulations, drug combos, changing dosing, etc etc. They will still have plenty of protection.

Healthcare is not just an optional luxury that the private sector should be able to just bilk the populace for huge profits. There is a needed balance between private enterprise and public welfare. You wouldn't expect the Police to charge you to solve a family members murder or stop a robber, nor would you expect the Fire Dept to get a down payment and signed invoice before they put out the fire in your house (tho it all costs money.)

The utter suggestion is silly, but is analogous to what some hardline conservatives propose drug companies and healthcare providers should be allowed to run.

 

[imported_inspire]

Originally posted by: bozack
http://www.boston.com/business...ing_generic_biologics/

WASHINGTON - President Obama's budget would pave the way for government to approve generic versions of biologic drugs, an administration official said yesterday, a move that could save taxpayers, insurers, and patients billions on the world's most expensive drugs but could hurt profits of some Massachusetts biotechs.

The budget, which will be released today, will remove barriers to creating generic biologics, said an administration official. The money the federal government would save from biogenerics would help pay for a major overhaul of the nation's healthcare system the president has promised to enact this year.

The Food and Drug Administration currently has no process for approving biogenerics, also called "follow-on biologics" and "biosimilars." Such drugs are made from living organisms, not chemicals, and are extremely difficult to duplicate precisely. Congress in the last few years has haggled over how to create regulations to approve generic versions of biologics.

The generic industry has proposed letting companies copy biologics after three to five years, similar to rules set for conventional drugs under the 1984 Hatch-Waxman Act. The administration's proposal suggests the time frame would be consistent with Hatch-Waxman, though administration officials could not confirm that last night.

But biotechnology companies have fought to keep a monopoly on their drugs for at least 14 years. They say they need that amount of time in order to ensure a return on the significant investment required to develop biologics. Companies also fear patents will not fully protect biologics since competitors could make a similar molecule that may not be covered by the patent.

Massachusetts boasts one of the world's biggest biotech centers, with dozens of companies developing biologics. Several, including Genzyme Corp. and Biogen Idec Inc., already have significant drugs on the market that generate billions of dollars in annual sales. But biotech executives warn that if Congress makes it too easy for generic drug companies to introduce competitors, it could cripple their revenue and discourage them from investing billions of dollars to develop new life-saving therapies.

Still, at least one Massachusetts company, Momenta Pharmaceuticals Inc. in Cambridge, could potentially benefit from the legislation, because it is helping some partners develop copies of biologics for other countries.

Representatives from the biotechnology industry could not be reached last night, and the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, which represents the broader drug industry, said it would withhold comment on specific aspects of the budget until they were officially released.

But proponents of biogenerics praised the news. "We believe generic biologics legislation will happen this year and will generate significant savings and be pivotal to financing broader health reform," said Mark Merritt, president of the Pharmaceutical Care Management Association, which represents drug benefit management companies. "And it will most importantly bring competition to the most expensive medicines available."

Kathleen Jaeger, president of the Generic Pharmaceutical Association, said the period of market exclusivity allowed under Hatch-Waxman should protect research and development investments. The law grants five years to makers of a new chemical entity and three years for more incremental innovation.

Administration officials did not say last night how much the budget provisions would save the Medicare and Medicaid programs. But the Congressional Budget Office estimated last year that the federal government would have saved $6.6 billion over 10 years under proposed legislation that would have provided biotech companies 12 years of market exclusivity for new biologic drugs.

Gotta love it, it was fun the past few days watching local companies stocks drop after this announcement...I wonder if all of those working in that industry who were supporters of Obama are happy now, I know my wife was saying that her companies stock took a pretty good hit and her co workers who were big Obama supporters were not at all pleased. With the state of the economy in MA it will be fun watching the biggest industry and those on the cutting edge of technology take a crushing blow.

Simply awesome!

If Obama keeps eroding Capitalism and Free Market Principles at this rate, there won't be an economy to stimulate. Seriously, what in fuck's name is he thinking? When will people wake up? When the Dow drops below 6,000, will it still be Bush's fault? This guy is directly sabotaging our economic system so he can replace it.

 

[MooseNSquirrel]

Of course we should blame Obama, he's had all of two months to destroy years of Republican brilliance*.

S&M

* see partisan games are fun!

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: inspire

If Obama keeps eroding Capitalism and Free Market Principles at this rate, there won't be an economy to stimulate. Seriously, what in fuck's name is he thinking? When will people wake up? When the Dow drops below 6,000, will it still be Bush's fault? This guy is directly sabotaging our economic system so he can replace it.

You can't honestly believe that. If you do, seek professional help as you are suffering from severe paranoia. Remember all those people who thought Bush was an evil genius bent on destroying America? Remember how dumb they sounded? That's how you sound now.

The Dow dropping below 6,000 would still be much more Bush's (and his predecessors') fault than it would be Obama's. His administration has issued very few regulations, and the legislation he has passed has not had time to take effect in any meaningful way. The only effect you could really say he's had so far would be a psychological one, but psychology is not why the DOW has lost 50% of its value over the last year or so and you know it.

 

[Bitek]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: inspire

If Obama keeps eroding Capitalism and Free Market Principles at this rate, there won't be an economy to stimulate. Seriously, what in fuck's name is he thinking? When will people wake up? When the Dow drops below 6,000, will it still be Bush's fault? This guy is directly sabotaging our economic system so he can replace it.

You can't honestly believe that. If you do, seek professional help as you are suffering from severe paranoia. Remember all those people who thought Bush was an evil genius bent on destroying America? Remember how dumb they sounded? That's how you sound now.

The Dow dropping below 6,000 would still be much more Bush's (and his predecessors') fault than it would be Obama's. His administration has issued very few regulations, and the legislation he has passed has not had time to take effect in any meaningful way. The only effect you could really say he's had so far would be a psychological one, but psychology is not why the DOW has lost 50% of its value over the last year or so and you know it.

No no. Bush is only responsible for the 7000pt drop from 14 to 7k. Obama owns the last thou to 6K. What an asshole. Totally ruined the economy. See what happens when you elect Dems? :0