Obama's health policy may give a booster dose to Indian generics

[chess9]

I'm sure CEO compensation isn't holding back, say, Schering-Plough. Their boss earned only $25 million two years ago. That wouldn't support much research....

Astra-Zenica's CEO's compensation is probably $50 million this year.

Tsk, tsk.

-Robert

 

[winnar111]

Originally posted by: Dari
"Conservatives" were against protectionism before they were for it. Another stupid thread by winnar.

Funny. I never said anything about being in favor of it.

I have to laugh, though, at how the left says it's apparently dangerous to import Brazilian ethanol or Chinese McDonald's toys, but apparently its safe to import Indian medicines.

 

[Dragula22]

Originally posted by: frostedflakes

Originally posted by: Dragula22
You guys keep bringing up the fact that R&D investment is increasing.

So..you think pharms like Merck is cutting 10,000 jobs for the fun of it? The reason they're cutting jobs is very simple. It is not the Vioxx lawsuit (a settlement was reached costing several billions) nor is it the bad state of the economy.

The reason they are cutting jobs is BECAUSE nothing is coming out of the pipeline in the foreseeable future, while at the same time losing billions in revenue due to patents expiring and generics coming out.

Poor business model? What kind of business model do you expect when your product has only several years on the market before its patent expires? Big Pharm companies need to continuously bring NEW drugs to market to survive.

Companies like Merck used to R&D for over 20-30 diseases at once. Now they are leaning out and only focusing on 6-7 highly profitable markets like cardio/diabetes/etc. This can't be good long term...

Don't patents last 14 years before becoming public domain?

Wow, bozack is spot on. Yes, the actual effective patent life is more along 6-7 years. Clinical trials, is just intrisically a long process because we need to monitor long term side effects. A lot of times, many variables are out of the pharm company's control (for example, gathering a sizeable pool of trial candidates).

And on another note, the generics are GROWING. They're becoming much more efficient at bringing a copycat product to market as soon as they're allowed. Research/Clinical trials are by far the biggest cost to bringing a drug to market. Manufacturing (what generics only have to do) is pennies in comparison. And this is all fine. We live in a competitive free market and once a patent expires the generics SHOULD have the right to produce pills.

What IS STUPID is that the patent law for drugs doesn't take into account the downtime. What are the odds congress changes that? None.

So in summary:
FDA being more strict
Generics are becoming much more efficient
Nothing in pipeline
=
Revenues for pharm companies go bye bye

The old days of big pharmaceutical companies reaping in all the profits are OVER. Now they are basically trying to stay afloat and all the job cuts are evident of this. Long term prospects for us, the consumers, aren't good.

People live too long anyway (Biggest reason for increased health costs). Maybe this will bring the average life expectancy to a moderate level.

 

[bozack]

Originally posted by: DukeN
Time for a reality check. Waning profits of the drug industry? What's next - you're gonna complain about Exxon only making $8B instead of $10B a quarter?

Last I checked Merck and Pfizer had EBITDA and operating cash flows of over$8-$10B a year. These behemoths don't lose money from operations, and have ridiculous amounts of cash on hand. Built by plundering the working class directly and indirectly with outrageous prices.

The prices for drugs are stupidly inflated, as there are no checks and balances to ensure that people don't get wiped out because they needed a treatment or two. And if there is competition, it rarely occurs within two drugs that cater to one individual.

If this was ten or fifteen years ago I would probabily agree with you, and chess has a good point too that the CEO and exec's salaries could stand for a realignment but as a realist I know the likelihood of that happening is pretty slim.

Duke, again...the companies are pretty large and they are still making profits off their currenly on patent drugs, once these fall off then they won't be making much if anything at all.

For the past six years I can say for a fact two of the major players have had flat or reduced operating budgets and have cut heavily in many many areas of the business, from systems support, sales, and operations.

As I said above Merck just announced three site closings in one year, approximately 10,000 layoffs again this year, and word is more are to follow.

Some people might think this is great news but why is beyond me...small biotechs really only might have the capital to persue one potential CD and even that is risky, wheras the big guys used to have enough to dip into everything, they provided great working environments for their employees and fantastic benefits.

 

[Rio Rebel]

Bozack is right on most of these issues. There is a tremendous amound of ignorance around the cost of medicine.

I don't know what is being spent overall, but I can tell you from personal experience that in one of the major Pharma companies being discussed, offshore outsourcing is absolutely gutting the workforce. IT jobs have been moved over for years now, leaving a fraction of US employees and almost completely drying up the contracted work for local IT people. But the surprising thing to me is how aggressively they are trying to outsource much of the work in drug discovery and clinical trials.

 

[Dari]

Originally posted by: winnar111

Originally posted by: Dari
"Conservatives" were against protectionism before they were for it. Another stupid thread by winnar.

Funny. I never said anything about being in favor of it.

I have to laugh, though, at how the left says it's apparently dangerous to import Brazilian ethanol or Chinese McDonald's toys, but apparently its safe to import Indian medicines.

Extrapolation won't do you any good without evidence of something being wrong with Indian generics, let alone any other generic drugs.

 

[Dragula22]

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: winnar111

Originally posted by: Dari
"Conservatives" were against protectionism before they were for it. Another stupid thread by winnar.

Funny. I never said anything about being in favor of it.

I have to laugh, though, at how the left says it's apparently dangerous to import Brazilian ethanol or Chinese McDonald's toys, but apparently its safe to import Indian medicines.

Extrapolation won't do you any good without evidence of something being wrong with Indian generics, let alone any other generic drugs.

Facilities in India are a joke compared to here. We have reactors, great control schemes, and many redundancies to ensure a quality product is being produced.

In india, you probably just have guys stirring a big pot in the open. It's just not the same. Labor is so cheap there that it's not worth putting in automated computer systems. The cost-savings are the big driver for this. It's just silly to expect the facilities in India to be on par with the rest of the western world.

 

[Dari]

Originally posted by: Dragula22

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: winnar111

Originally posted by: Dari
"Conservatives" were against protectionism before they were for it. Another stupid thread by winnar.

Funny. I never said anything about being in favor of it.

I have to laugh, though, at how the left says it's apparently dangerous to import Brazilian ethanol or Chinese McDonald's toys, but apparently its safe to import Indian medicines.

Extrapolation won't do you any good without evidence of something being wrong with Indian generics, let alone any other generic drugs.

Facilities in India are a joke compared to here. We have reactors, great control schemes, and many redundancies to ensure a quality product is being produced.

In india, you probably just have guys stirring a big pot in the open. It's just not the same. Labor is so cheap there that it's not worth putting in automated computer systems. The cost-savings are the big driver for this. It's just silly to expect the facilities in India to be on par with the rest of the western world.

I'll give you that. So where's the evidence I asked for? And why are there Indian drug companies listed in America?

 

[Vette73]

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: Dragula22

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: winnar111

Originally posted by: Dari
"Conservatives" were against protectionism before they were for it. Another stupid thread by winnar.

Funny. I never said anything about being in favor of it.

I have to laugh, though, at how the left says it's apparently dangerous to import Brazilian ethanol or Chinese McDonald's toys, but apparently its safe to import Indian medicines.

Extrapolation won't do you any good without evidence of something being wrong with Indian generics, let alone any other generic drugs.

Facilities in India are a joke compared to here. We have reactors, great control schemes, and many redundancies to ensure a quality product is being produced.

In india, you probably just have guys stirring a big pot in the open. It's just not the same. Labor is so cheap there that it's not worth putting in automated computer systems. The cost-savings are the big driver for this. It's just silly to expect the facilities in India to be on par with the rest of the western world.

I'll give you that. So where's the evidence I asked for? And why are there Indian drug companies listed in America?

I use to work in a couple drug companies. The FDA will travel to any site that sells drugs in the world and it has to meet the same standards to be sold in the US. One place I worked at we had inspectors from Canada, Japan, etc.. come to see our site and either apporve or deny it as able to import our product. We, FDA/US, do the same.

So their place has to meet the same standards as a us plant.

 

[GroundedSailor]

Originally posted by: Dragula22

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: winnar111

Originally posted by: Dari
"Conservatives" were against protectionism before they were for it. Another stupid thread by winnar.

Funny. I never said anything about being in favor of it.

I have to laugh, though, at how the left says it's apparently dangerous to import Brazilian ethanol or Chinese McDonald's toys, but apparently its safe to import Indian medicines.

Extrapolation won't do you any good without evidence of something being wrong with Indian generics, let alone any other generic drugs.

Facilities in India are a joke compared to here. We have reactors, great control schemes, and many redundancies to ensure a quality product is being produced.

In india, you probably just have guys stirring a big pot in the open. It's just not the same. Labor is so cheap there that it's not worth putting in automated computer systems. The cost-savings are the big driver for this. It's just silly to expect the facilities in India to be on par with the rest of the western world.

Do you seriously believe that? Lol?

 

[umbrella39]

Oh I get it!


NOW we give a shit about jobs going over to India. OP, you are a fucking piece of glass and an idiot.

 

[nobodyknows]

Originally posted by: winnar111

Originally posted by: Rainsford
So your in favor of protectionism at the cost of peoples' health? Obama's plan sounds like a pretty good idea to me, and honestly I don't think we'll lose many pharma jobs in the US. Drugs in the US are so ridiculously overpriced that I have a hard time believing JOBS will be the first thing cut if competition heats up. I just don't buy that big pharma companies are the ones we need to be protecting against the hordes of sick people who need to choose between food and medicine.

Not at all. I'm curious as to the liberal theory that protectionism is somehow great when it protects the job of labor unions and unskilled workers, but not in this scenario. They have constantly whined about President Bush's trade agreements.

I do believe we have to honor our constitutional responsibility to protect our patents, though.

Where are we not ??

 

[BoomerD]

I'd be VERY concerned about importing drugs from a 3rd world nation that is rampant with corruption. How do you ensure that the final product is safe and contains no tainted chemicals? Or that the QC inspectors aren't taking bribe to allow "lesser quality" products to get by?
Do the Indian pharmacutical companies get their supplies from China? We all have heard the horror stories about a wide variety of tainted products coming from THAT country.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: BoomerD
I'd be VERY concerned about importing drugs from a 3rd world nation that is rampant with corruption. How do you ensure that the final product is safe and contains no tainted chemicals? Or that the QC inspectors aren't taking bribe to allow "lesser quality" products to get by?
Do the Indian pharmacutical companies get their supplies from China? We all have heard the horror stories about a wide variety of tainted products coming from THAT country.

Well unless you HMO demands that you use generics you can always pay for the original.

 

[BoomerD]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: BoomerD
I'd be VERY concerned about importing drugs from a 3rd world nation that is rampant with corruption. How do you ensure that the final product is safe and contains no tainted chemicals? Or that the QC inspectors aren't taking bribe to allow "lesser quality" products to get by?
Do the Indian pharmacutical companies get their supplies from China? We all have heard the horror stories about a wide variety of tainted products coming from THAT country.

Well unless you HMO demands that you use generics you can always pay for the original.

I have no problem with generics...not at all.

My problem is with pharmacuticals from countries where their standards are lower than ours.

and YES, I AM something of a protectionist...I go out of my way to buy American-made products.

 

[umbrella39]

Why the hell are we even talking about India when Canadian drugs are dirt cheap and are much closer to home? As far as I know, it is still illegal to order drugs from online Canadian pharmacies or to drive into Canada and fill a script.

Why won't our own FDA admit that drugs manufactured in Canada were not made in someone's bathtub in Cambodia and are completely safe? Why don't they know like the rest of us that most of the drugs sold by Canadian internet pharmacies are drugs made in the USA, that have simply been sold to Canadian distributors at a much, much lower price?

What does our wonderful FDA do? They make the whole process illegal so they can increase the profits of the American drug industry. EOS.

I am hoping this new president does something about this, but I won't be holding my breath.

 

[Vette73]

Originally posted by: BoomerD

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: BoomerD
I'd be VERY concerned about importing drugs from a 3rd world nation that is rampant with corruption. How do you ensure that the final product is safe and contains no tainted chemicals? Or that the QC inspectors aren't taking bribe to allow "lesser quality" products to get by?
Do the Indian pharmacutical companies get their supplies from China? We all have heard the horror stories about a wide variety of tainted products coming from THAT country.

Well unless you HMO demands that you use generics you can always pay for the original.

I have no problem with generics...not at all.

My problem is with pharmacuticals from countries where their standards are lower than ours.

and YES, I AM something of a protectionist...I go out of my way to buy American-made products.

The standards are not lowwer. They have to meet the same FDA standards that any and all other makers have to meet as well no matter where they are made.

 

[BoomerD]

Originally posted by: Marlin1975

Originally posted by: BoomerD

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: BoomerD
I'd be VERY concerned about importing drugs from a 3rd world nation that is rampant with corruption. How do you ensure that the final product is safe and contains no tainted chemicals? Or that the QC inspectors aren't taking bribe to allow "lesser quality" products to get by?
Do the Indian pharmacutical companies get their supplies from China? We all have heard the horror stories about a wide variety of tainted products coming from THAT country.

Well unless you HMO demands that you use generics you can always pay for the original.

I have no problem with generics...not at all.

My problem is with pharmacuticals from countries where their standards are lower than ours.

and YES, I AM something of a protectionist...I go out of my way to buy American-made products.

The standards are not lowwer. They have to meet the same FDA standards that any and all other makers have to meet as well no matter where they are made.

Just like Chinese made products have to meet certain standards...except when actually tested...they fail those tests.
I'd rather have our pharmacutical products made in the USA or at least in a country that has a better reputation.

 

[winnar111]

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: winnar111

Originally posted by: Dari
"Conservatives" were against protectionism before they were for it. Another stupid thread by winnar.

Funny. I never said anything about being in favor of it.

I have to laugh, though, at how the left says it's apparently dangerous to import Brazilian ethanol or Chinese McDonald's toys, but apparently its safe to import Indian medicines.

Extrapolation won't do you any good without evidence of something being wrong with Indian generics, let alone any other generic drugs.

What's so wrong with Brazilian ethanol that we have to put a tariff on it?

 

[Dari]

Originally posted by: winnar111

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: winnar111

Originally posted by: Dari
"Conservatives" were against protectionism before they were for it. Another stupid thread by winnar.

Funny. I never said anything about being in favor of it.

I have to laugh, though, at how the left says it's apparently dangerous to import Brazilian ethanol or Chinese McDonald's toys, but apparently its safe to import Indian medicines.

Extrapolation won't do you any good without evidence of something being wrong with Indian generics, let alone any other generic drugs.

What's so wrong with Brazilian ethanol that we have to put a tariff on it?

This forum should have a minimum age requirement for posters. Winnar111, if you're not too young, you must be retarded. Nobody should have to explain to you that the point of a tariff has nothing to do with safety, but everything to do with protectionism.

 

[frostedflakes]

Originally posted by: winnar111

Originally posted by: Rainsford
So your in favor of protectionism at the cost of peoples' health? Obama's plan sounds like a pretty good idea to me, and honestly I don't think we'll lose many pharma jobs in the US. Drugs in the US are so ridiculously overpriced that I have a hard time believing JOBS will be the first thing cut if competition heats up. I just don't buy that big pharma companies are the ones we need to be protecting against the hordes of sick people who need to choose between food and medicine.

Not at all. I'm curious as to the liberal theory that protectionism is somehow great when it protects the job of labor unions and unskilled workers, but not in this scenario. They have constantly whined about President Bush's trade agreements.

I do believe we have to honor our constitutional responsibility to protect our patents, though.

Interesting. I thought you righties claimed that the Constitution does not apply to foreign countries and peoples, because that's how you support torture, permanent detention, etc. But now you're saying our Constitutional laws do in fact apply internationally? Can't have it both ways, so which is it?

 

[winnar111]

Originally posted by: frostedflakes

Originally posted by: winnar111

Originally posted by: Rainsford
So your in favor of protectionism at the cost of peoples' health? Obama's plan sounds like a pretty good idea to me, and honestly I don't think we'll lose many pharma jobs in the US. Drugs in the US are so ridiculously overpriced that I have a hard time believing JOBS will be the first thing cut if competition heats up. I just don't buy that big pharma companies are the ones we need to be protecting against the hordes of sick people who need to choose between food and medicine.

Not at all. I'm curious as to the liberal theory that protectionism is somehow great when it protects the job of labor unions and unskilled workers, but not in this scenario. They have constantly whined about President Bush's trade agreements.

I do believe we have to honor our constitutional responsibility to protect our patents, though.

Interesting. I thought you righties claimed that the Constitution does not apply to foreign countries and peoples, because that's how you support torture, permanent detention, etc. But now you're saying our Constitutional laws do in fact apply internationally? Can't have it both ways, so which is it?

No, I'm saying that while other countries may or may not freely violate our patents, we should not be allowed to import these cheaper products into this country as that would shift the patent violation from foreign soil to domestic soil.

It's no different than Chinese pirated movies. Stop it at the borders. Just like Guantanemo is outside our borders.

 

[winnar111]

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: winnar111

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: winnar111

Originally posted by: Dari
"Conservatives" were against protectionism before they were for it. Another stupid thread by winnar.

Funny. I never said anything about being in favor of it.

I have to laugh, though, at how the left says it's apparently dangerous to import Brazilian ethanol or Chinese McDonald's toys, but apparently its safe to import Indian medicines.

Extrapolation won't do you any good without evidence of something being wrong with Indian generics, let alone any other generic drugs.

What's so wrong with Brazilian ethanol that we have to put a tariff on it?

This forum should have a minimum age requirement for posters. Winnar111, if you're not too young, you must be retarded. Nobody should have to explain to you that the point of a tariff has nothing to do with safety, but everything to do with protectionism.

Kind of curious, then, how our next President is so keen on protecting the Illinois farm industry, but Merck and Phizer don't receive the same treatment.

 

[nobodyknows]

Originally posted by: winnar111

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: winnar111

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: winnar111

Originally posted by: Dari
"Conservatives" were against protectionism before they were for it. Another stupid thread by winnar.

Funny. I never said anything about being in favor of it.

I have to laugh, though, at how the left says it's apparently dangerous to import Brazilian ethanol or Chinese McDonald's toys, but apparently its safe to import Indian medicines.

Extrapolation won't do you any good without evidence of something being wrong with Indian generics, let alone any other generic drugs.

What's so wrong with Brazilian ethanol that we have to put a tariff on it?

This forum should have a minimum age requirement for posters. Winnar111, if you're not too young, you must be retarded. Nobody should have to explain to you that the point of a tariff has nothing to do with safety, but everything to do with protectionism.

Kind of curious, then, how our next President is so keen on protecting the Illinois farm industry, but Merck and Phizer don't receive the same treatment.

If you really believe that then you should sell your pharm stocks and buy a real "pharm".

 

[winnar111]

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

Originally posted by: winnar111

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: winnar111

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: winnar111

Originally posted by: Dari
"Conservatives" were against protectionism before they were for it. Another stupid thread by winnar.

Funny. I never said anything about being in favor of it.

I have to laugh, though, at how the left says it's apparently dangerous to import Brazilian ethanol or Chinese McDonald's toys, but apparently its safe to import Indian medicines.

Extrapolation won't do you any good without evidence of something being wrong with Indian generics, let alone any other generic drugs.

What's so wrong with Brazilian ethanol that we have to put a tariff on it?

This forum should have a minimum age requirement for posters. Winnar111, if you're not too young, you must be retarded. Nobody should have to explain to you that the point of a tariff has nothing to do with safety, but everything to do with protectionism.

Kind of curious, then, how our next President is so keen on protecting the Illinois farm industry, but Merck and Phizer don't receive the same treatment.

If you really believe that then you should sell your pharm stocks and buy a real "pharm".

I probably should, before Obama skyrockets the capital gains tax.