They can either take an off patent drug and “tweak” it so that the Lyricas will have insurers refusing to pay for them in leu of cheaper products without first testing to see if those cheaper products are sufficient enough.

Or they can go the Dilantin route and “tweak” them down, get them approved by office of generics, and have insurers wanting people to go with better tested generics, not really knowing if a new formula is safe until post marketing, which for a generic is pretty much ignored.

Tweaking has been so successful thus far.

I do hope that investment professions aren’t fooled into thinking that market leadership and growth of ibuprofen in Argentina is meaningful to the company as a whole, particularly in light of Lipitor’s loss of exclusivity. I presume that anyone who knows that market knows just how that growth is attained. (Pfizer has long assumed what isn’t reported up the line won’t hurt them.)

Similarly, I assume that they are not fooled by the markets touted for their perceived value of brand names. Think about it, people. These countries may be developing, but they are not stupid. Follow the money…

Secondly, in my opinion, manipulating existing products is juvenile. Small carbon molecule medications have failed to impress for quite some time now with any typical pharmaceutical company. Red biotechnology, nanotechnology, et. al. is where they should go and focus on to remain admirable.