FDA enables Pharma rebranding and gouging on old medications

[Hacp]

Pure greed? Its called profit. If you can't pay for the drug, then you can't have it. Simple as that.

 

[waggy]

This actually isn't the first time they've done this. My dad told me that Big Pharma got some inexpensive inhalers taken off the market because Big Pharma said they were an environmental hazard and now everyone has to pay for an overpriced inhaler.

Apparently, this is popular, because people keep on voting for all this corporate welfare. Few people sincerely care, or else they'd vote for someone who would abolish the FDA. Too many people believe the BS that the FDA keeps us safe, when they do just the opposite.

this happened a few years ago. i used to get inhalers for my asthma at $10 for 2 and that would last a long time.

then they changed them. the new ones cost $10 for one and last about 2 months.

its insane.

the FDA is a joke. its all about makeing money for pharma.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Why are people complaining? Many want government to handle healthcare and you have it. This situation exists because the FDA is responding to Congresses mandate. In fact it was they who enacted the exclusive patents to compensate companies for spending the fortune to jump through the hoops. You asked for it and you got it.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

The FDA probably was correct in putting these Drugs through Trial, but they should have also had a special regimen of Regulation regarding Pricing to the Patent holders. They probably didn't foresee such huge Price increases. If these Price Increases are truly required to recover the Cost for the Testing/Trials, perhaps a longer temporary protection should have been offered. However, these are likely just gouging due t.o lack of Competition.

That's not within the mandate of the FDA. It's the responsibility of those wonderful people in Congress who will run single payer. Only say nice things.

 

[sandorski]

That's not within the mandate of the FDA. It's the responsibility of those wonderful people in Congress who will run single payer. Only say nice things.

Well, somebody dropped the ball. I suspect on purpose.

 

[Darwin333]

The FDA probably was correct in putting these Drugs through Trial, but they should have also had a special regimen of Regulation regarding Pricing to the Patent holders. They probably didn't foresee such huge Price increases. If these Price Increases are truly required to recover the Cost for the Testing/Trials, perhaps a longer temporary protection should have been offered. However, these are likely just gouging due to lack of Competition.

I am not in the pharmaceutical industry nor am I a regulator of the pharmaceutical industry and I know damn well what happens to the price of a drug when any single company is/becomes the sole manufacturer of that drug. They didn't foresee such huge price increases???? Foe real dawg?

This shit ain't rocket science. I am actually kind of hoping it is collusion because if they truly are that fucking dumb we are way more fucked than I thought.

 

[Darwin333]

Well, somebody dropped the ball. I suspect on purpose.

I sure as hell hope so.

 

[sandorski]

I am not in the pharmaceutical industry nor am I a regulator of the pharmaceutical industry and I know damn well what happens to the price of a drug when any single company is/becomes the sole manufacturer of that drug. They didn't foresee such huge price increases???? Foe real dawg?

This shit ain't rocket science. I am actually kind of hoping it is collusion because if they truly are that fucking dumb we are way more fucked than I thought.

There's history regarding Healthcare in the US regarding this. Industry assurances of doing one thing, then turning around and doing the opposite once they can. I'm sure the Industries "Free Speech" has a lot to do with it.

 

[Chaotic42]

A week ago I watched a documentary series about the history of illegal drugs. Before the US required companies to list ingredients on things, most of those Dr Feelgood cures were really just opium or cocaine. Sometimes in extremely large amounts like 40% morphine by weight. Yeah that probably would help with your insomnia...

"Hey Doc, my foot hurts"
"Try refreshing Crack!"

A world without the FDA?

 

[3chordcharlie]

Pure greed? Its called profit. If you can't pay for the drug, then you can't have it. Simple as that.

They can, and have been paying for the drug. There's absolutely no justification for re-patenting and obscene price increases.

Somebody, apparently, was able to make a profit at the old price.

 

[davmat787]

Isn't this the same tactic street dealers use... get you hooked then jack up the price?

 

[Mr. Pedantic]

Why are people complaining? Many want government to handle healthcare and you have it. This situation exists because the FDA is responding to Congresses mandate. In fact it was they who enacted the exclusive patents to compensate companies for spending the fortune to jump through the hoops. You asked for it and you got it.

Because it would also be nice if the government handled drug pricing as well. See how this works? The whole can't-have-one-without-the-other situation? This is the reason Obamacare is going to suck. Because neither side is going to get their way. Both sides will have to compromise to get part of what they want. And it doesn't work. There's even a name for this kind of thinking, it's called the Fallacy of moderation.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Because it would also be nice if the government handled drug pricing as well. See how this works? The whole can't-have-one-without-the-other situation? This is the reason Obamacare is going to suck. Because neither side is going to get their way. Both sides will have to compromise to get part of what they want. And it doesn't work. There's even a name for this kind of thinking, it's called the Fallacy of moderation.

Congress purposefully set things up this way. My point is if they can't get the little things right how would something far more complex possibly come out right? It can't unless things are worked out in advance of legislation. Otherwise we get this.

 

[Bitek]

Everytime I see this talk of Pharma owning the FDA, it always seems quite divorced from reality. J&J, often thought the gold std in the industry, just had three plants seized by the FDA and were put under consent decree. Anyone who knows about the industry knows this as "an ass raping." This will cost JnJ millions if not billions. Wyeth's consent decree after Phen-Fen (two previously long used and deemed safe drugs) cost the company $20 Billion and that was for not stopping off-label use by diet doctors, not what the company promoted use for.

If there have been 23 deaths from use of this drug, try to think about it from the victim's family's perspective:


F: "Why did Dad die? They've used this drug forever?!"
FDA: "Well, we've never had drugmakers prove the safety and efficacy of the drug in trials, we've just grandfathered it in bc its been used forever and seemed safe based on history."
F: "Why are they giving out drugs if we're not sure they are safe?!"
FDA: "Uhh, given the adverse drug events in recent years with GF drugs... maybe we should rethink this..."

So FDA talks to the Drug Manufaturer

FDA: "There have been many adverse drug events with this drug, we would you to do trials to show safety and efficacy."
DM: "A trial would cost 10s to 100s of millions, at $.10/pill, we'd never make the money back! No thank you, we'd rather just stop making the drug."
FDA: "Ok, we'll give you patent protections if you take the risks of the trials."
DM: "Lets sit down and see what makes sense"

Safe, Effective or Cheap. Pick the two you want, its rare to be able to do all three, sometimes even one is a struggle. FDA and Pharma are always asked to do all three, and people always complain when it doesn't work out that way, but reality has a way of disappointing like that.

 

[BoberFett]

If there have been 23 deaths from use of a drug, I'd say why the hell are we worried about it? Don't want the risk? Don't take the drug.

 

[ShawnD1]

If there have been 23 deaths from use of a drug, I'd say why the hell are we worried about it? Don't want the risk? Don't take the drug.

Depends how many people took it. If 1 million people get falling down drunk and 23 of them die, that's not a big deal. If 200 people are on some weird medication, 23 is a lot.

 

[BoberFett]

Depends how many people took it. If 1 million people get falling down drunk and 23 of them die, that's not a big deal. If 200 people are on some weird medication, 23 is a lot.

Agreed. But by the same token, if only 200 people are on a drug, then maybe it actually isn't worth making in which case the answer is the same. There's no need for the FDA to do anything about it.

I'm all for full disclosure, anybody taking a drug should be made fully aware of potential risks, but I see no need for direct interference. Let patients and their doctor choose their level of risk, not the government.

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

http://healthland.time.com/2011/03/...-the-exorbitant-new-cost-of-a-pregnancy-drug/

The cost of a drug used to prevent premature birth in high-risk mothers will rise from around $10 per dose to $1,500, now that the FDA has approved a branded version of the medication. The new medication is a form of progesterone, which has already been prescribed for decades and is currently made for this purpose by specialty drug stores known as compounding pharmacies.

More at link. This is insane.

 

[BoberFett]

Can you feel the hope and change?

Thank god we didn't end up with a Republican in the White House.

 

[ShawnD1]

murphy's law: mccain would have died if elected then palin would be the most powerful person in the world. that's a scary thought.

 

[BoberFett]

murphy's law: mccain would have died if elected then palin would be the most powerful person in the world. that's a scary thought.

Scary as that may be, we don't seem to be that much better off under a Democrat. I wonder how things would have looked in that election if McCain had chosen a real running mate instead of a pair of tits with glasses?

 

[dmcowen674]

This is pretty screwed up.

Nothing screwed up about it.

It is 110% sanctioned scam.

Only way to stop this shit is all out revolt on the Corporations that control the Government.

 

[dmcowen674]

Pure greed? Its called profit.

If you can't pay for the drug, then you can't have it.

Simple as that.

Hope there is a drug you can't afford to survive, then we'll see how fast you change your tune.

 

[3chordcharlie]

Scary as that may be, we don't seem to be that much better off under a Democrat. I wonder how things would have looked in that election if McCain had chosen a real running mate instead of a pair of tits with glasses?

There's a difference between the current GOP and current Democrats.

But there's NO difference in their absolute willingness to fuck the people on behalf of their donors.

 

[Modelworks]

This will cost JnJ millions if not billions. Wyeth's consent decree after Phen-Fen (two previously long used and deemed safe drugs) cost the company $20 Billion and that was for not stopping off-label use by diet doctors, not what the company promoted use for.

I have no sympathy for them. It is well known that companies sell products they know are questionable and weigh how much they can make in profits vs how much the lawsuits will cost. Documents have been leaked over and over showing it.

$20 billion ? That didn't stop Pfizer from buying Wyeth for $68 billion.