You should all be ashamed that you work for such a greedy company.
60 Minutes
- Thread starter Anonymous
- Start date
-
- Tags
- None
What exactly do you do for free or give away for free?
Raising the price by 300% of an existing drug isn't exactly giving it away now is it?
When you consider all the years of LIFE that Gleevec/Novarits has given patients over the last 13 years I would say they got quite a bargain and by the way so do most of them. And in regards to multiple patients going bankrupt paying for Gleevec that's just a bold face LIE. Our Patient Assistance and Co-Pay Assistance funding is the most generous in the industry. I've been promoting Gleevec for over 10 years and I have always been able to tell my customers that no patient that has needed Gleevec hasn't gotten Gleevec due to the cost of the drug, PERIOD. Gleevec does not deserve to be in the same story with Sanofi. Their drug increased median survival by 41days! People with CML will more than likely die from natural causes thank to Gleevec. The drug is a bonafide God Damn Miracle. Oh and Dr Kantarjian has some nerve. Funny how 60 minutes didn't ask him how much money he and his research has received from Novartis over the last 15 years. Talk about biting the hand the LITERALLY feeds him. Nice try. What a JOKE.
You make good points but there is no way you can justify the price increases.
You need to think about future research. Money funds research for future drugs. Without money, there is no research and less new drugs to save lives.
The general public who do not have exposure to what goes on within R&D, never make that connection
The start of the public outcry and call for price controls in the guise of "the public good".
Ha! We can all see how the "research" has worked out for Novatis over the past 8 years or so. Company can't bringing a whole lot of new products to market when you are laying off employees for 8 years running.
The pharma industry has no facts to stand on here.
Profits going to "innovation"? - FACTS show that of all of the New Molecular Entities (NMEs) that US pharma has sought licenses for over the laST 30 years, over 80% offered little or no clinical difference to those already on the market. They simply researched, developed and marketed to charge the US Healthcare system more for the same effects.
If it were true that the majority of profits were used to produce drugs with benefits as you described here then it would be true that limiting Pharama profits would hurt innovation.
You guys' defense of price gauging by your employer is simply rationalizations to help you sleep at night.
Profits going to "innovation"? - FACTS show that of all of the New Molecular Entities (NMEs) that US pharma has sought licenses for over the laST 30 years, over 80% offered little or no clinical difference to those already on the market. They simply researched, developed and marketed to charge the US Healthcare system more for the same effects.
If it were true that the majority of profits were used to produce drugs with benefits as you described here then it would be true that limiting Pharama profits would hurt innovation.
You guys' defense of price gauging by your employer is simply rationalizations to help you sleep at night.
When people start looking for an Eboli cure because it becomes worldwide let's blast pharma then. It is a known fact that the US citizens pays for the cost of most drugs, while the rest of the world benefits.
How about our President for letting people in from known countries of Eboli.
How about our President for letting people in from known countries of Eboli.
Preach. The industry is a God damn embarrassment. It has been for years, the difference now is that more and more people are catching on...
It isn't "a known fact that the US citizens pays for the cost of most drugs, while the rest of the world benefits." You moron. That is why any group that depends upon its credibility signed up to support Obamacare. EVERY US Professional Healthcare organization did so. And, before you start pulling out the old trope "Like the AMA who criticizes it?" groups like the AMA criticize for not being MORE like Europe's healthcare system. Your employer and their Pharma peers spent 100's of millions to support it because they knew that the facts were against them and it was only time. The current situation offers them a glide path out.
As stated above, 80% of all NME's marketed in the US offered little or no clinical improvements over those already in the market. In the US, we payed full price for them while Europe didn't. We got gauged and they paid little or no more for little or mo more benefits.
Those are the facts.
And it wasn't this president who forced cuts to the NIH.
Does this "research" include faking studies, data manipulation, hiding 10,000 side effects nearly 4000 of them serious & paying some shill 100K annually to do a trial comparing a 30 year old ACEI to a combination of 2 newer drugs with a whopping 4.7% improvement over said 3 decade old medicine?
Don't forget BILLIONS with a B spent on marketing the plethora of Me Too 'breakthroughs'
The NIH & public research institutions discover more molecules than all pharma combined. Fancy that
Do you think there is more than a handful of people on this site that have the ability to think about future ANYTHING? These people are idiots that can't see passed their own noses. They want fast-food, immediate gratification no matter what the cost. Pathetic!
So gas prices can go up, Orange juice can go up, bacon can go up, but when it comes to drugs....?
Why does the govt. and dirty, shakedown agencies like the FDA always get a free pass?
Oh right, they support one another.....go red, white and blue.
Why does the govt. and dirty, shakedown agencies like the FDA always get a free pass?
Oh right, they support one another.....go red, white and blue.
No one is forcing the euro trash's to operate in the USA so if it's such a paradise in Europe Canada Australia Russia China India Japan Pakistan etc go there We have plenty of domestic me too companies & Gleevec in India is $300 a month so adios, sayonara, buh bye
Hey Dip Stick why don't you point out that much of the funding for gleevec was provided by the NCI & Leukemia & Lymphoma Society
Much of the research and development of gleevec was carried out by Dr. Brian Drucker of the Oregon Health and Science University. His lab, working in a partnership with a scientist working for Novartis, identified the compound STI571. They first used the compound to cure cancer in mice. Dr. Drucker oversaw the first clinical trial, and other early Phase I clinical trials. He also participated in each of the clinical trials cited in the FDA approval of the drug for treatment of Chronic Myeloid Leukemia. While he was developing the drug his laboratory's funding sources were:
• 50% National Cancer Institute
• 30% Leukemia and Lymphoma Society
• 10% Novartis
• 10% Oregon Health and Science University