Can you all imagine that if stem-cell research is successful for the
top 5 medical conditions - we may not have anything to talk about!
Maybe Pharmalot would cease to exist.
Sam

Your argument still doesn’t fly. Statins were competitive before the entry of generics. The simple truth that you seem unwilling to acknowledge is that a patent on a chemical entity is not a monopoly on a drug class. And, for the vast majority of situations, competition is within drug classes.

Finally, another point that seems to fly right over your head is the fact that Part D already has negotiation–by PBMs and health plans on the government’s behalf (ie, the same way they do it on behalf of the federal employees health benefits program). Since the CBO and CMS actuaries recognize that “government negotiation” is likely to be conducted in a similar fashion, neither organization expects a significant savings just from negotiation. In all likelihood, in order to save money, other mechanisms will be used–price controls, mandated rebates, etc. While all save money, none amount to “REAL-MARKET-DRIVEN NEGOTIATIONS.”

Atlex

Arcane Arts? Is that arcane medical arts, arcane legal arts, or arcane mystical arts?

All are arts.

Unless Condor can enlighten us we’ll have to decide based on the original context.

Seeing that the generic statins would begin to reach market in 2006, Merck partnered in 2002 with Schering-Plough to add Ezetimibe (Schering’s then-experimental drug) to simvastatin (branded as Lipitor), and call it “Vytorin” — to extend the Cholesterol Franchise’s patent-life, and stave off a switch to generic statins.

The problem now becomes that it seems like Vytorin may not work (ENHANCE) to reduce risks of CV events, and may actually elevate the risk of a wide variety of cancers (SEAS).

[We won't know until 2012, when IMPROVE-IT is complete, according to Schering.]

Despite the pharma spins on all of this — we should wait no longer than the FDA’s final pronouncements — due out very-soon on ENHANCE, and due out in about February of 2009 on SEAS.

So, tell me once again, folks — why should these characters be EXEMPT from price negotiations with the government-payers?

BTW, Crestor was FDA approved in 2003.

Namaste

Now — I’ll let the rest pass — but this one deserves a full response:

2:24 PM (Yesterday)

Condor,

“Your lack of reading comprehension is amazing. I have never said that innovation depends on monopolies and subsidies from the US government. I believe that innovation–in most industries–depends on fair and appropriate intellectual property standards (ie patents). As I have “proven”, patent protection rarely produces anything but a very short term monopoly in pharma. Typically, once a product is produced in a new drug category, competition is close behind. I’m waiting for you to demonstrate how Lipitor and Crestor are monopolies when simvastin is growing its share significantly. . . .”

– Atlex

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Atlex, you said that innovation, in the long term, will be hurt by GOVERNMENTAL price controls — that is exactly the opposite of what is being proposed — what is being proposed is REAL-MARKET-DRIVEN NEGOTIATIONS.

Please explain how those hurt innovation.

Now — as to Crestor, Lipitor and generic statins — you have cleverly picked a drug where the monopolies are EXPIRING. Even so, there were perhaps 10 years of high returns while Lipitor was an exclusive — a branded, FDA approved, patented (read: noone else could make or market it) drug. Crestor is a statin, Lipitor is a statin, and now each faces generic statin competition. Deal.

Now that monopoly-time is ending.

The crux of all of this is that pharma cannot have its “monopoly” cake — and “eat it, too” — in the form of protection from price negotiations — where, as here, the government is a very-powerful counter-party on the other side of the price negotiations. That’s life.

Again — deal wid’ it.

It’s like arguing over the definition of is.

Tie the enemy up over minutia.

Forget the real issue, there is no price negotiation with Medicaid and companies promote misuse of drugs that are reimbursed under medicaid. (Could this be major health care fraud agaist the US government?)

Could you point out where Condor likened the law to scorcery. I simply can’t find it anywhere.

Condor does use the term arcane but that only means that a limited number of people understand those laws. Although sorcery is often referred to as arcane, this does not mean that all arcane knowledge is sorcery.