Deals to Keep Generic Drugs Off Market Get a Court Rebuff.

[elleng]

Source: NYT

It would seem a business executive’s dream: legally pay a competitor to keep its product off the market for years.

Congress has failed to stop it, but for more than a decade generic drug makers and big-name pharmaceutical companies have been winning court rulings that allowed it.

Until this month. Now, a federal appeals court in Philadelphia has rejected the arrangements by ruling that a payment aimed at keeping a low-priced generic copy of the drug off the market for a certain period of time is anticompetitive on its face.

The Philadelphia ruling conflicted with decisions from at least three other federal circuit courts of appeal, setting up the issue for possible review by the Supreme Court within the next few years, if it accepts the case. A decision either way could profoundly affect drug prices and health care costs.



Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/27/health/policy/drug-makers-deals-with-generic-rivals-may-face-justices-review.html?hp

[freshwest]

1. Good.

[raouldukelives]

2. Instead of subsidizing Exxon & war maybe one day we can put easing peoples suffering

and torment on as high as a pedestal. Sadly nobody from Wall St would profit so it serves no purpose other than good publicity and who gives a shit about that anymore. Captives don't need to be persuaded.

[99th_Monkey]

3. AHHH!! So THIS is why my "generic" Lipitor still costs an arm & leg

My cardiologist prescribed this for me last Oct ('11) saying don't worry about the
high copay ($42) because it was "going generic" in Nov.2011. But when I went
in mid-to-late Nov. to get my "generic" it was exactly the same copay ($42).

NOBODY (not my Dr., or my pharmacist, nor my insurance company (AARP/
Secure Horizons) has been able to adequately explain to my why the fuck it is
that a "generic" costs me exactly as much as the non-generic.

It's great that the NYTimes is shedding some light on this situation; because it
renders the whole generic pricing structure totally meaningless and shamelessly
exploits the public, esp. those of us living on low fixed incomes.

Thanks SO much for posting this!!!

I never cease to be amazed at what sleazy scumbags these pharmaceutical
corporations are ... un-fucking-believable..

[elleng]

4. Fortunately heading for decent anti-trust 'enforcement.'

Fingers crossed.

[99th_Monkey]

5. +100 nt

[savannah43]

6. The court is going to interfere with the "30-30 Field Testing" of new drugs?

30 people take a new drug for 30 days and if no more than 3 people die within that period, the FDA approves the drug? That's it? Oh, wait a minute. That's all we get now. Thus the reason for all the disclaimers on the TV and magazine ads for new drugs. Don't say you weren't warned about "possible side effects." You assumed the risks, consumers. Don't even try to sue Big Pharma for damages from their toxic products. BTW, only New Zealand and the US allow drug companies to advertise their products. Are you honored? Me neither.

[sarcasmo]

7. Big pharma, Big! crooks.

[n2doc]

8. Collusion, plain and simple n/t

[berryj]

9. Spam deleted by gkhouston (MIR Team)