Slashdot Mirror
Patent Expires On Best Selling Drug of All Time
Hugh Pickens writes "The U.S. patent has just expired on Lipitor, the best-selling drug of all time, as the first generic versions go on sale, marking the end of a brand that has dominated the drug industry, lowered the cholesterol of tens of millions of patients, and generated $10.7 billion last year in annual sales. But drug manufacturer Pfizer, dependent on Lipitor for almost one-fifth of the company's revenue, does not intend to go down without a fight. Pfizer is employing unprecedented tactics to hold onto as many Lipitor prescriptions as it can with an aggressive marketing plan and forging deals with insurers, pharmacy benefit managers and patients to meet or beat the price of its generic replacements because even at the lower price, Pfizer has a huge profit margin because of the relatively low cost of materials for Lipitor. Some deals require pharmacies to reject prescriptions for low-cost generics and substitute a discounted name-brand Lipitor while other deals block generic makers from mail-order services that account for an estimated 40 percent of all Lipitor prescriptions. 'Pfizer's tactic of dressing up as a generics company is pulling the rug under the incentive system created to foster the development of generic drugs,' says attorney David A. Balto."
My ass. you grant a monopoly to someone. That someone gets big on that monopoly. You think that they would just let it go when patent expires ? think again. has music industry let it go with copyrights ? no, they are trying to extend it to 120 years now. pfizer is just another example. bad example though - they could just lobby beforehand and try to extend patent durations, like music industry does with copyrights.
Read radical news here
At least Pfizer isn't trying to unreasonably extend the patent, sue its customers, or use other underhanded tricks to cheat the system at the expense of everyone else.
Unlike some other...companies.
re patenting in 3. 2. 1.
I'd jump with joy, but I might get an aneurysm.
To offset political mods, replace Flamebait with Insightful.
A patent is going to expire. The company responds with marketing and by lowering it's price.
That's just horrid~ Someone is working to hard to find ills.
What's that? there are going to create a generic version of the drug they created? OMG!!1!!!
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
We don't need any regulations the free market will take care of this in 3, 2, 1...... heheheheh
Hey, they are just taking care of their stockholders Nothing wrong with it, right?
Capitalism, it just works, bitches.
Today Pfizer announced results of a new study showing that cholesterol has nothing to do with any health problems whatsoever, but water can kill you. Simultaneously they announced the start of trials of a new drug to control this menace, tentatively named hydroprofitor.
>Some deals require pharmacies to reject prescriptions for low-cost generics
This is illegal on its face.
--
BMO
Damn public! how dare they want affordable drugs for healthcare!!!!
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Generic cocaine now?
So, if congress has been able to withstand the lobbying for indefinite patents, given the massive amount of money on the line as indicated by this single drug patent, how come they fold to the likes of Disney when it comes to copyright? Maybe it's the cuteness of the cartoon characters.
Better known as 318230.
Save! Save! Save! Operators standing by! Call now! 1-800-DOT-COMM to place your order!
Ugh. I can just hear the wretched radio adverts already...
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
Brief, government monopoly blip of control over a standardized extract of an ancient Chinese medicine comes to an end. There. Fixed that for you.
They have a huge profit margin because of the stunning breakthrough they funded when they backed Bruce Roth.
Roth first synthesized atorvastatin in 1985. For the discovery, he received the 1997 Warner-Lambert Chairman's Distinguished Scientific Achievement Award, the 1999 Inventor of the Year Award from the New York Intellectual Property Law Association, the 2003 American Chemical Society Award for Creative Invention, the 2003 Gustavus John Esselen Award for Chemistry in the Public Service, the 2005 Iowa State University Distinguished Alumni Award, and the 2006 Pfizer Global Research and Development Achievement Award.
Roth was named a 2008 Hero of Chemistry by the American Chemical Society (ACS).
They found a drug that helped people's health, sold it for massive profit while the patent lasted - working as expected.
Patent expires, they start to compete against the generic makers based on price - working as intended.
Patients get the drug at a cheaper price. Generic drug makers who expected to make a bunch of profit suffer.. who cares?
The profit either goes to A or B, as long as the system incentivizes the discovery of more drugs it's working fine.
Phizer was able to extend the drug by getting new patents on it. Then for these past few months they paid off the generic drug makers to not create generics for the drug. A scheme known as "pay for delay". Heard about it yesterday on Marketplace and was shocked to hear that a generic drug company has to go to court after the patent has expried to official unexpire it. "This is the government policy, set up in the 1980s, to bring us lower drug prices." http://www.marketplace.org/topics/business/lipitor-makes-way-generics
If Pfizer is offering Lipitor cheaply, what's the problem? Seriously, unless the goal is to actively punish companies that create drugs and bear the cost of research and the risk of scum-sucking tort lawyers, let Pfizer compete, and if their pricing is competitive, more power (and market share) to them.
If the goal is to say "once patents expire, the originating company is never again permitted to sell their invention", just say so and try to justify it.
Everybody gets what the majority deserves.
They should talk to Groupon!
Pfizer spends alot on doctors paying them to write scripts for pfizer drugs.
I didn't know there was even a patent on weed. I'll probably still stick with the name brands, though.
I'm pretty much convinced that Lipitor is a scam, along with the whole "cholesterol" theory. This will just lead to more drug-laden zombies, and more overprescription for perfectly healthy people.
"He who would learn astronomy, and other recondite arts, let him go elsewhere. " -- John Calvin, commenting on Genesis 1
Without patents things would be any better? Ooops.
Fandroids hate facts.
Actos is the next medicine to be manipulated away. Set to become generic next summer and I predict it will not happen.
I can't tell if you're serious or being sarcastic.
I thought Lipitor was a character in He-Man and the Masters of the Universe. Wasn't he Skeletor's brother, the one with high cholesterol?
Pfizer is a for-profit company, and that they want to patent their product and profit from their ingenuity is great. That's how capitalism works: sell a good product that people want to buy, turn a profit, succeed.
However, drug patents last up to 20 years. Rather than riding heavily on Lipitor profits for that period of time, and releasing alternate versions of the same drug over and over again, wouldn't it have been prudent to turn efforts toward producing and patenting the Next Amazing Drug?
They knew the day would come that Lipitor's patent would expire. If, in spite of the massive profits they've made from this and other products, they couldn't innovate anything to replace that massive chunk of profits, then they have to bow out gracefully instead of going through ridiculous, unsavory means to ensure revenue.
Profiting morally from a good profit is capitalism. Tactics like this are not.
Canada has had generic Lipitor for over a year now.
Undetectable Steganography? Yep, there's an app fo
that the quoted David A. Balto is an anti-trust attorney, and from his statements likely working for a generic drug manufacturer(s). He argued for the ATT/T-Mobile merger, so one can tell he's not particular about which side he argues.
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
http://chriskresser.com/the-hidden-truth-about-statins for starters. Nobody should be on statins, at best they do no harm, at worst they are an endocrine poison.
fuck Pfizer, they never developed much of their own, they bought Warner-Lambert and others to acquire this drug and other drug candidates.
They followed this up by closing down their most productive R& D sites globally.
Vast personal profit for the execs, decades of experienced researchers tossed to the wind, and their "if we screened X million candidates with this robotic platform and got N useful hits, if we screen X^5 million via robotic screen we'll get N^5 final candidates and reap the rewards" strategy didn't work worth a darn. Big surprise.
That's what happens when suits (some hired from companies with a GREAT track record for drug development- like.... McDonalds) take over a scientific company.
A few more rounds of boosting stock price via layoffs and this will be a little has-been of a company.
Nice work there guys. Way to destroy a company. You could have done the same thing by just buying a pizza chain or something and selling off assets for personal gain, and not cost the real human race useful medications.
All of these cholesterol drugs including Lipitor work by mucking about with your liver. I am type 1 diabetic and my doctor prescribed a low dose of Zocor (a similar cholesterol drug). After about a year I started experiencing weird join pain and nerve problems. My first concern was ALS - I knew someone who died of it. I saw doctors, including a neurologist, had lots of tests done . Nothing. It wasn't until a year later that I read an article in the LA times about Zocor being withdrawn from the market at a higher dose because of the same symptom that I realized what was causing them. None of my doctors told me anything.
My cholesterol isn't really that high. My doctors prescribed it because of the diabetes. I stopped taking it and the pain improved dramatically. At one point it was so bad I could barely lift the top off of a coffee can.
The other side is the garbage that we call food. Most of it is loaded with trans-fatty oils and added sugars. Forget all of the claims on the front of the box - get a microscope and read the ingredient list on the back. If there are hydrogenated oils or lots of added sugar (any form of corn syrup, anything with *ose, "designer" sugars such as honey, molasses, evaporated cane juice, etc. Try to find foods that have fewer ingredients that can pronounce you actually might have in your kitchen. They are available and often don't cost much more. Some of the more reliable brands are Kashi, Amy's, Trader Joe's, Edy's, Martins, etc.
If you take any of these drugs, look them up on youtube (don't bother with webmd or anything similar as they are useless). The results might scare you.
"Be grateful for what you have. You may never know when you may lose it."
Slashdot's idea of the best selling drug and my idea of the best selling drug are completely different!
They followed this up by closing down their most productive R& D sites globally.
Vast personal profit for the execs, decades of experienced researchers tossed to the wind, and their "if we screened X million candidates with this robotic platform and got N useful hits, if we screen X^5 million via robotic screen we'll get N^5 final candidates and reap the rewards" strategy didn't work worth a darn. Big surprise.
That's what happens when suits (some hired from companies with a GREAT track record for drug development- like.... McDonalds) take over a scientific company.
A few more rounds of boosting stock price via layoffs and this will be a little has-been of a company.
Nice work there guys. Way to destroy a company. You could have done the same thing by just buying a pizza chain or something and selling off assets for personal gain, and not cost the real human race useful medications.
Pfizer did not discover or invent Lipitor. Lipitor was discovered and invented by Warner Lambert/Parke-Davis in Ann Arbor, Michigan, in an industrial setting, not academic. Warner Lambert/Parke-Davis partnered with Pfizer to develop and market the drug and share the profits. From the profits of Lipitor alone, Pfizer was able to buy and takeover Warner Lambert/Parke-Davis, where it closed the Ann Arbor site a few years later in 2007 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=02krhNFfEq4). Of the 2200 scientists at the Ann Arbor site, approximately 600 remained with the company, of which approximately 300 relocated to Groton, CT, Pfizer's legacy discovery research site. The other 300 scientists relocated to sites in St. Louis, MO (winding down and eventually closing), La Jolla, CA, and Sandwich, England (now in the process of closing - over 2000 jobs lost). In these relocations, Pfizer was very generous and bought families homes for the original price and paid to relocate employees and their families across the world. Pharmaceutical site closures are very expensive and impact families and disrupt local economies significantly; purchasing employees homes is an incentive to retain talent. Pfizer assisted employees buy new homes by paying for real estate agents and paying closing costs on homes. In 2009, Pfizer bought Wyeth Laboratories and laid-off tens-of-thousands of scientists, many of them from Ann Arbor, MI, its most successful discovery research site ever based on the site talent, technology, and number of marketed drugs from that site, Groton, CT, and many from Wyeth various sites in the U.S. Several years ago, Pfizer was able to reduce the cost of manufacture of Lipitor more than 200-fold using a series of natural wildtype and industrially modified enzymes.
Pfizer's former CEO Jeffrey B. Kindler and former CEO of McDonalds, became so unpopular with the rank-and-file that he earned two nick-names, first "McBurger," and finally and more commonly known as "CLOWN SHOES" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=clgRId8x0ZM). Employees would and still post about dissatisfaction with the company's direction and leadership on BioFind.com (http://biofind.com/rumor).
Well was the patient old? Did they have some other problem or sickness? Just taking some pill, no matter how popular, will not prevent one from getting old! What other details about about this patient are we not being told..
what? oh? Not patient, Patent
never mind.
There's a vaccine to prevent a virus that causes cervical cancer. Unless you are living in a cave you would have heard of it. The development and even the US FDA trials were paid for by the Australian taxpayer, yet in the USA it sells for far more than anywhere else becuase that is what the market will bear. The US drug company that licenced it is not paying any more per dose than anyone else either, that extra money is pure profit. That's just one very blatant example of many.
I suggest you pay more attention before writing "bears only the most tenuous connection to the truth" then following that with something that is incorrect.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
With all the outrage over huge profits from a drug like Lipitor, no one brings up the fact that these companies spend millions on drug research the pans out to squat because the product doesn't make it through FDA trials.
I get the whole idea of "they made billions on that drug, look at them try to farm it for more money." I find that view less than even-handed. A company develops a product that extends useful lifespan, I'm glad for it and they should be amply rewarded for doing so. Could drugs be cheaper? Probably, but I'm not going to offer a position on a given company's profits on a single drug when I DON'T have full knowledge of the amounts of money spent on endeavors that went sorely negative. Every time you read a story about a drug that didn't make it through whatever phase of FDA drug trials and you can bet that's millions of dollars down the tubes. And yeah, the ones that work have to produce revenue to pay for that particular drug's development and turn a profit, AS WELL AS make up for the ones that didn't work out that millions got flushed on.
The system has warts but it is what it is, if large profits aren't there as a potential reward we aren't going to get advanced drugs and treatments to prevent, remedy and cure human ills because a company has to put up major bank to develop those things. Mod me down but that is business reality.
Best selling drug of all time? Never heard of aspirin?
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
No, part of me wonders the same thing. There has been research published recently that suggests that the link between serum cholesterol and cardiovascular disease may not be as direct as once thought. If the thing that we're measuring does not have a direct correlation to future disease, then the drug we're taking to lower the measurement might not have any real benefit. Statins like Lipitor have probably improved the health of a lot of people, but they may still be overprescribed.
I mean, TFA itself says Lipitor is "the best-selling drug of all time." Really? Would that many people really have died of heart attacks had they not been prescribed this drug?
People talk about how "modern diet, modern society is killing us" -- again, really? You should have seen how my grandfather ate. He'd trim the thick ribbons of fat from the ends of his pork chops so he could eat them last, then he'd eat the fat off everybody else's plate. He lived to a reasonable age, long before statins were ever invented. Sure, that's anecdotal, but where are the statistics? Was heart disease caused by high cholesterol really that much more common among my grandfather's generation? Or my father's? So much more common that it proves that almost everybody ought to be on Lipitor? My gut tells me no. Some studies from England (where my grandfather lived) suggest rates of heart disease did increase through the postwar years, but then started to decline in the 1970s -- again, before statins were even available. One does have to wonder.
Breakfast served all day!
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
www.lipitorforyou.com
When your argument spurs hundreds of Slashdotters to defend both patents and big pharma... you lose.
Surely Alcohol is the best selling drug of all time
Lipitor is the best selling drug of all time? Have they not heard of caffeine? Pfiezer may have sold 14.3 billion dollars of Lipitor, but coffee sales alone are worth 18 billion dollars. Add to that colas, energy drinks, chocolate bars, and you're talking some pretty serious coin.
When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
'nuff said.
I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
I'm a pharmacy technician for a major retail pharmacy chain. I see a lot of people talking about drug research and development on here, and billions upon billions of dollars being spent. Here's what I was required to learn in order to obtain my certification as a pharmacy technician:
Drug companies routinely spend about 11 years and 400,000,000.00 to develop a drug, at this point, it goes to market. The patent is obtained when the chemical compound is first discovered. This means that before they can market the drug, they have to go through all the animal and clinical testing and prove that it does what it's supposed to. The time remaining on the patent when they get the drug to market is how long they have to try and get back all of the money they spent on research and development, as well as make a profit.
After this point, other companies can apply to make the same drug (SAME drug, within about a 98% guarantee) under a different patent. This is what Pfizer is trying to stop from happening.
What I'm wondering is why this isn't seen as discouraging competition, if not making it downright impossible. Pfizer is a huge company. I'm sure you'll still want your 20.00/pill Viagra, if you require it, and if Pfizer goes under, You're screwed! (Pardon the pun...unless you take Levitra or Cialis or any of the other boner-inducing tablets.)
http://pipeline.corante.com/archives/2011/08/03/a_former_pfizer_executive_finally_trashes_pfizers_strategy.php
About an article written by a former R&D head at Pfizer:
". . .In this article, it is argued that although mergers and acquisitions in the pharmaceutical industry might have had a reasonable short-term business rationale, their impact on the R&D of the organizations involved has been devastating"
http://features.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2011/07/28/pfizer-jeff-kindler-shakeup/
Did CEO Jeff Kindler get pushed out because he was shaking up the dysfunctional pharmaceutical giant -- or because he's an ineffective leader?
http://pipeline.corante.com/archives/2011/05/26/pfizers_brave_new_medchem_world.php
Pfizer outsourcing most chemistry benchwork to China:
Most compounds, and most actual chemistry bench work, is apparently going to be done at WuXi (or perhaps other contract houses?)
Lipitor has had an ANDA filed for a generic version by Watson, yes. However, the law allows Pfizer to grant a 180 day exclusivity contract to a manufacturer of their choice (in this case Watson) for the ANDA. To those affected by this drug going generic: IT HAS NOT GONE TRULY GENERIC YET! Wait until the 180 day exclusivity contract expires (in 179 days) and the true "invisible hand" will take effect in the market.
In the meantime, you're most likely going to need to get the BRAND NAME Lipitor for it to be covered to the fullest extent by your pharmacy benefit manager ("insurance company")! These PBMs get rebates (NOT kickbacks) to lower the cost of the brand-name drug, so it's financially advantageous to the member to not cover the generic yet. Here's why:
Lipitor (brand) 90ct bottle = $550 retail, minus $330 in rebates = $220 total cost of drug.
atorvastatin by Watson (generic) 90ct bottle = $530 retail, minus $0 in rebates (Watson doesn't offer any) = $550 total cost of drug.
(These amounts are fictional, however they represent true real-world scenarios.)
Disclaimer: I work for one of the US' largest Pharmacy Benefit Managers in the Clinical Review department. We had a meeting today regarding all of our Medicare Part-D patients and how they're affected by this specific drug going generic. No suits were involved and the members are receiving the best possible drug savings until the exclusivity contract expires. Once it expires the new generics will be placed on the tier-1 ("generic") copay structure.
the human trials are over and it is considered safe for us to use now?
"Oh, you hate your job? There's a support group for that, it's called everyone, they meet at the bar."
RE: "Patent Expires On Best Selling Drug of All Time"
There's a patent on alcohol ? Who knew ?
For example, there was a study back in August in the American Medical Association journal that foods such as nuts are more effective at lowering LDL cholesterol than statins like Lipitor, and I've seen similar citations than fish oil. So why not eat nuts instead of spending more money on pharmaceuticals? Or is chewing too much work for the lazy couch potatoes?
"Politicians and diapers must be changed often, and for the same reason."
Just FYI about generics and lipitor (atorvastatin). Lipitor falls in a class of molecules called statins, all of which inhibit the exact same enzyme (HMGCoA reductase, the rate limiting step in cholesterol biosynthesis). Although they all are somewhat distinct due to being different molecules: they may have different absorption, excretion, off target effects (side effects), efficiency at inhibiting the desired enzyme, etc. But the point is, there already exist generic statins...
Statins can inhibit many other cellular processes besides cholesterol synthesis such as coenzyme Q10 synthesis (involved in ATP energy production, pretty important, so it's no wonder there are side-effects). Hopefully the loss of patent will cause drug companies to find new drugs with less side effects (like the dual inhibitors discussed in basic research here http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21903868, though that the molecules discussed don't seem realistic, but the approach is reasonable).
And in the long run, especially in moderation, its probably a lot safer than the shit Pfizer's selling. Just don't drink and drive.
If someone is passing you on the right, you are an asshole for driving in the wrong lane.
If they lower their prices to match/beat the generics, then I'd say the system is working. Now if only those patents expired faster.....
Another non-functioning site was "uncertainty.microsoft.com."
The purpose of that site was not known.
My doctor switched me to Lipitor so i could get the generic version for cheaper.
Currently, i have to pay $3.00 for name brand meds, and $1 for generic, but that is like tripling in feb 2012. Damn Medicare, or whatever it is. (no, i don't really pay attention.)
I was taking Crestor before.
Be seeing you...
OxyContin (hillbilly heroin), a time release Oxycodone formulation has been the subject of an on-going legal battle over the patents related to it, the few remaining ones are set to expire in 2012 iirc.
We're going to see an explosion of generics hit the market soon, and I'm abuse will be at an all time high.... I know this is a wonderful drug for people in chronic pain, but I've also seen it destroy so many lives over the years (I'm from the area where abuse of this drug was first reported). I've seen it destroy so many families, I fear the day the generics start to hit the market.
I honestly find it amazing how much things have changed in the last 20 years. I can't believe they're allowed to put those "ask your doctor about drug "x"!" commercials on TV. I remember, 20 years ago, you'd never see these "pill pushers" dress in suits coming in to the doctors office. Now a days I see at least 4 or 5 every time I have to go see old saw bones, and he's really quick to hand me free samples of something or write me prescriptions to things like the Valium or some type of pain medication as a "quick fix". I know what you're saying; Go see another doctor...I've been through 10 in a year and I see the same thing at every single one of them.
Look, if we're going to have a war on drugs we shouldn't be allowing big pharma to advertise directly to us via the TV, that's all I'm saying. If I need to be on some type of medication, I shouldn't have to ask my doctor about it, he should use his training and experience and prescribe something for me and follow up on it. Above all other things, he should tell me the risks of taking the prescription instead of writing it and sending me on my way.
"$20 co-pay on your way out please, NEXT!"
Anyway...sorry for the rant, I just felt it was worth mentioning.
I'm fairly sure that would be alcohol.
We see in both copyright and patents the opportunity to offer a tradeoff for the granted rights. Let the companies like pharmaceuticals and music firms select between a tight grip with short life, or a loose grip with long life.
That is, you can have exclusivity for five years, or you can have forced-licensing for 20. The latter means the market is open, and the licenses are dictated by some combination of demand/benefit and cost.
The decision is made at time of publishing/patent granted, and cannot be changed to more restrictive, though can be changed to less restrictive.
Or your child is going to die of it, and you're a rich man.
Bingo.
NOTE: compression techniques should not be patented either, since without compression, the music industry would still have either magnetic tape or laserdisk as the only options for storing and selling movies. Compression means they can store much more data on much smaller media and reduce the cost of storage and dispersal of inventory, even to the extent of removing physical media altogether.
This reduces the cost of business, therefore there's no need for a patent monopoly on it.
This just cries for anti-trust case. Why, because patents are artificial monopoly on something. When patent expires, your monopoly also expires. Any action which aims artificiality restrict choice in your monopolised market is unlawful, period.
user@ubuntubox:~$ stfu This server is going down for shutdown NOW!
There no doubting that despite the excellent work pharmaceutical companies do, that they're really not viable (and increasingly less so with time) as private going concerns - ESPECIALLY if they have to resort to such shady and dishonest tactics to maintain their margins. Private big pharma is a classic case of market failure -- where they'd rather invest in anti-cholesterol drugs and dick pill for rich, fat, ageing Boomers, than creating medicines to save lives in Third World countries -- simply because it's more profitable.
I say tell the shareholders -- and their political backers on the Nazi punk Right to go and fuck themselves -- and nationalize all pharmaceutical companies and medical equipment makers in the national interest.
I'm sure that nobody except right-wing profiteers and class warriors would shed even a single tear for them.
Since Pfizer is able to make so much profit on an unpatented drugs, seems patents are not needed after all.
http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
Some people are allergic to nuts, a choice between high cholesterol or death....
http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
You're questioning the right things. Statins are a money making hoax. Oh, they accomplish what they set out to do, but the effect is beside the point. The body makes its own cholesterol. If it didn't, we would all die. You can't have a working brain and nervous system without cholesterol. Arteriosclerosis is caused by inflammation of arteries, not too much cholesterol.
Eskimos traditionally gorged on fat and ate practically no fruit and vegetables. And heart attacks were almost unknown. Japanese eat a lot of fat and are well known for living to a very old age. My grandfather loved red meat and heaps of fat, and gravy on everything. English style cooking. One of his favorite things to eat was gravy sopped up with pieces of bread. He also liked to make a super simple meal out of bread and milk. He lived actively to over 80 before modern medicine, and his heart was fine. We used to watch him go outside in shirtsleeves in a Vermont winter and shovel snow at over age 70, and he would run in the lawn with the kids in the summer. He had a lot in his favor, though. He was an MD (a real GP who went to homes to see patients) and later taught physiology at University. He used to run about on his daily travels when *NOBODY* ran - for his health and because he just had a zest for life.
Steamboat Willie has been on Lipitor for years.
The basic jist is that Pfzier is lowering their prices to compete with generics. Lower prices for all, guess who wins, the consumer. I think most commenters above are missing the forest for the trees.
...beats the generics by selling at a generics price, I don't really see what the problem is.
Ok, so go against the wishes of a Doctor? I would say that constitutes fraud and the Feds need to get involved.
Doctor's orders concerning the health and well being of a patient should overrule any vendor's wishes.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
And just how is this going to work? My insurance (Blue Cross/Blue Shield) REQUIRES generic drugs, when available.
healthcare is different. it is. if you don't understand that, you are a barbarian.
Barbarians are different. They are. If you don't understand that, you are a 1%-er.
...the trademarked name brand Lipitor with the usual color and shape pills, and also as a generic drug, perhaps with a different color or shape to the pills. It's not like they don't own pill press machinery capable of doing that.
Lexapro is an example of this. It was explained to me that only one of the isomers provides benefit while both cause side effects. This is possibly why some SSRIs make me extremely ill while the effects are tolerable on others. My insurance company keeps trying to get me to switch to another drug to save them money.
It is LITERALLY the same exact medication without a trade name
Ideally, yes. But that's not the case in reality. Different generics will use different fillers and different dyes, some of which cause an allergic reaction. The rules for drug content are also quite flexible. Per wikipedia:
The FDA requires the bioequivalence of the generic product to be between 80% and 125% of that of the innovator product.
This can mean different salts of the drug or, in the case of drugs with multiple active ingredients, quite different mixtures (usually with the about of the cheap ingredient boosted and the amount of the expensive ingredient cut). This can have a huge impact on side effects and overall efficacy (sometimes for better, sometimes for worse).
If you want a vision of the future, imagine a youtube comments section scrolling - forever.
I am Canadian, and I love our health care service. My mother died of cancer. Sadly they were not able to save her, but she received top end treatments in the attempt to save her (Chemotherapy etc). Total cost to her estate: $50 for the ambulance that took her to the hospital just before the end. Despite what many critics of our health care system often say, there was no waiting list, she had no delays in receiving her treatments etc.
Recently, my wife had to go in for eye surgery to straighten her eyes. It wasn't critical surgery, and she did have delays before it took place, but those may have been a natural part of diagnosing the problem. Cost to us: nothing. It was all covered.
These two instances were both covered by the standard health care that everyone receives in Canada. Despite what all the critics say, the system works up here.
I saw someone make a good bullet point about the difference between health care in somewhere like Canada or Britain and the US: Up here we have a health care system. Down in the US you have a healthcare industry :P
"The first time I got drunk, I got married. The second time I bought a chimpanzee, after that I stayed sober" Arian Seid
"Pfizer is employing unprecedented tactics to hold onto as many Lipitor prescriptions as it can with an aggressive marketing plan and forging deals with insurers, pharmacy benefit managers and patients to meet or beat the price of its generic replacements because even at the lower price, Pfizer has a huge profit margin because of the relatively low cost of materials for Lipitor."
Oh, the humanity! They're going to make a life saving drug cheaper than even generics! How dare they! And they even plan to keep making a profit while doing it!
My ass. you grant a monopoly to someone. That someone gets big on that monopoly.
Well, yeah? You think they spend billions making drugs so that a company who spent nothing can start churning it out a week later? Of course it's a monopoly! That's the point. But it's a temporary one.
This story isn't an example of why patents are bad. This just shows what happens under ANY patent system, and that its a good thing. We can argue the length of patents or what can be patented, but the idea of a patent itself is pretty much common sense. If you truly invent something, you get the right to own it for a certain period of time. You can charge what you want, sell it how you want, license it if you want, or do nothing with it at all if you so choose.
This simply shows that once that time runs out, you only have the advantage of the business you previously created around that patent. Prices are naturally going to fall because you now have competition. There is a reward for being the inventor, and there is a reward for letting the patent expire. That's a great setup, if you ask me. Sure, that means cutting edge drugs are expensive. But so are cutting edge phones, computers, cars, houses, etc. That's the way life works on this planet. If you do away with the systems that make the cutting edge expensive, you do away with the cutting edge almost all together. Then, you are going back to the days where inventors and artists needed rich, private benefactors who mostly wanted to keep that work private.
This story is not the evil of the system, that's how it's supposed to work.
On the other hand, you can do away with the patent system out of some commune living ideal and you'll watch Pfizer immediately close its R&D doors along with everyone else. Oh, they won't go out of business, they'll just keep making all the existing unpatented drugs, finding ways to make them cheaper. And you will have turned the entire pharmaceutical industry into the equivalent of McDonald's versus Burger King, where it's only about cheap additives, supply chains and brand marketing.
Why the hell would we want to do that? I'm a social liberal, but I'm a realist first. There is a reason Russia wasn't an invention powerhouse under Communism. It's the same reason China's Great Leap Forward was the largest genocide in the history of mankind.
I8-D
I love reading health kookery on the Internet.
The Eskimo myth. Are you serious? First of all they do have plenty of cardiovascular disease. Google "eskimo heart disease myth".
Second of all, it's all about the type of fat. Fish fat is (possibly) healthy. Saturated fat - not healthy.
Statistically, a high ratio of LDL to HDL cholesterol will increase your chances of heart disease. You can partake in Internet quackery and deny this all you like, but wouldn't your time be better spent analyzing a frame by frame picture of the 9/11 crashes and coming up with crackpot theories there, instead?
And how many of those allergic to nuts are allergic to fish oil as well?
Caridac Surgeons Dr. Dean Ornish and Dr. Caldwell Esselsytn --- the researchers who made the diet President Clinton used to lose 20+ pounds, have proven, clinically, that their diets reverse hardening of the arteries. Both Researchers have books for sale on Amazon.
I bet the cost of either book and simply eating differently is a lot cheaper than even a generic Lipitor.
Yeah, keep bleating "4 legs good, 2 legs bad." You can swallow the bullshit if you want, but the system is coming around to a better understanding of arteriosclerosis, aka atherosclerosis. For example, see Inflammation and atherosclerosis, Inflammation in atherosclerosis, and a lot of other research. Your "high LDL, low HDL" blood content has a correlation with arteriosclerosis, but which is the cause and which the response? Eh?
Pay special attention to findings like:
You are also seeing conventional medicine slowly (much too slowly) come around to an understanding what a wonderful food the egg is, how the phobia about butter and the fad for margarine have not been a good thing, and other truths you would probably label as quackery.
Deposits of cholesterol are the body's response to arterial pathology, not the cause of it.
Science has known for 40+ years than hypothyroidism causes elevated cholesterol levels (cholesterol is converted into pregnenolone, then to progesterone, then to the stress & sex hormones, but this conversion process does not work well if a person is hypothyroid), but there's more money in a patented pill than in properly treating thyroid problems. T4-only treatments with synthroid are not appropriate, because many bodies do not adequately convert storage T4 to the active T3. Because the medical profession does not adequately treat hypothyroidism, they assume that someone who's on synthroid is adequately treated, and make a lot of money treating the symptoms of hypothyroidism. Ahh, that doesn't make perfect sense but I'm pressed for time and can't craft the wording better right now, sorry.
diietary starches are more hazardous than sugars. Fruit is good, but the sugar in fudge (butter, cocoa, sugar) is better than cake (sugar, oil, flour).
Saturated fats are 1000x safer than polyunsaturated fats, especially fish oil.
Polyunsaturated fats help take out insulin-producing cells in the pancreas, somehow...
If anyone knows which experiment proved that unsaturated fats are actually "essential", please let me know, because I'm quite curious.
Learn the rules so you know how to break them properly.
www.teslabox.com
profits have to be made. Yet maximising profits, by high prices on monopoly drugs, resulting in preventable deaths, is evil
The difference between good and evil is what you decide is "enough" profit for them?
Isn't that essentially the same argument you're making?
"What in the name of Fats Waller is that?"
"A four-foot prune."
The traditional Inuit diet has changed significantly over the last few decades so that it today includes very high levels of carbohydrate intake.
Thus current studies showing cardiovascular disease profiles in Eskimo populations can be construed as supporting the idea that grain-based, high sugar diets are problematic. This is especially so when put in contrast beside older studies which showed low incidence of cardiovascular disease before the arrival of the Western diet.
Perhaps the mountain of industry generated, mostly fraudulent and deceptive "research" papers was compelling enough alone. Or perhaps the kickbacks for prescribing them helped influence them into simply drugging patients, as opposed to making more appropriate recommendations. That would require having enough time with a patient to actually learn something about them, and we all know HMO's will have none of that.
A more cynical person would conjecture that the "side effects" and "adverse effects" generated billions in profits alone, and who cares if people with insurance have strokes, they were covered, and received treatment, right ?
As medical costs continue their upward climb, and Americans accept docilely, their new group hallucination that passes for reality, who is going to be around to question the peer-review process that permitted these drugs to be widely dispensed to an unsuspecting and naive population ? Certainly not the army of clinicians that profit from their malpractice.
Science as the new religion is moving along swiftly, never have so many people understood so little and had so much faith in the things that keep them ill, ignorant, sick, and helpless feeling.
All least we can all feel "connected" to one-another in our Brave New World.
pfuck.pfizer.