HealingWell
Search Close Search
☰

CEO who raised price of old pill more than $700 calls journalist a ‘moron’ for asking why

Support Forums
>
Ulcerative Colitis
✚ New Topic ✚ Reply
❬ ❬ Previous Thread |Next Thread ❭ ❭
Posted 9/21/2015 10:31 PM (GMT 0)
/www.washingtonpost.com/news/to-your-health/wp/2015/09/21/ceo-of-company-that-raised-the-price-of-old-pill-hundreds-of-dollars-overnight-calls-journalist-a-moron-for-asking-why/

Daraprim has been on the market for 62 years and is the standard of care for a food-borne illness called called toxoplasmosis caused by a parasite that can severely affect those with compromised immune systems. Turing Pharmaceuticals purchased the rights to the drug last month and immediately raised prices from $13.50 per pill to $750.00 per pill overnight.

John Carroll, the editor of Fierce Biotech, a daily newsletter about the industry, was one of the first to ask Turing chief executive Martin Shkreli directly to explain the move. In a hot-headed Twitter exchange over the weekend, Shkreli declined to provide additional information and instead launched into a series of personal attacks against Carroll -- calling him "irrelevant" and someone who doesn't "think logically."
Posted 9/21/2015 10:51 PM (GMT 0)
Well that's cuz he didn't have a really good answer.

I'm kinda angry at the company that makes the oral vankomaycin because they are charging like 2k for a script and the generic iv version is so cheap. Meaning the actual drug is not expensive they are just trying to make profits.

I understand they have to make money but 2 grand is a big bill for antibiotics.
Hospitalized Patients are forced go swallow the iv version which tastes terrible
Posted 9/21/2015 10:58 PM (GMT 0)
Is there not a generic version of the drug now? If not, some drug company will soon come along and undercut this ass for sure
Posted 9/21/2015 11:03 PM (GMT 0)
Hillary claims to be coming out with a proposal soon regarding prescription drugs. I think there are things which can be done but I hope her plan doesn't entail adding more money onto the 19 trillion dollars we already owe. I don't think Big Pharma is all bad but they certainly deserve the reputation they have. It's stuff like this that feeds all the anti-BigPharma people. Drugs do have their place in treatment plans, even expensive drugs, but crap like this does more harm than good and these idiots don't seem to realize it. Part of the problem is that the drug companies are trying to screw the health insurance companies more than they are trying to screw people but not only does the trickle down effect reach most of us anyway, but innocent people wind up sometimes taking on the full brunt.
Posted 9/21/2015 11:07 PM (GMT 0)
I am thankful that I am no longer pouring money into that industry. I hope it lasts a long time. It's sickening how much money I've spent on pills and infusions over the past few years. I would imagine the amount billed has to be over $1,000,000, definitely well over with treatment of the unknown, resistant infection - caused by the medication tongue.

If I were uninsured I would be in a hole too deep to come out of.
Posted 9/21/2015 11:20 PM (GMT 0)
This reminds me of the Asacol/Delzacol fiasco. Greed greed greed, my Delzacol is over $1000 a month!
Posted 9/21/2015 11:46 PM (GMT 0)
I read this article on the NY Times, got my blood boiling; corporations buying out and then making cheap generics expensive. Isn't that what happened with colazol, a uc generic med?
Posted 9/22/2015 12:52 PM (GMT 0)
He seems to be claiming on their fav TV channel that all money he makes out of this drug will fund research in new treatments. This sounds cool in theory but looking at his history, very difficult to trust his motives.
Posted 9/22/2015 1:09 PM (GMT 0)
Interesting watch:
/www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrRXvtFfcZ4#t=16
Posted 9/22/2015 3:15 PM (GMT 0)

garylouisville said...
Hillary claims to be coming out with a proposal soon regarding prescription drugs. I think there are things which can be done but I hope her plan doesn't entail adding more money onto the 19 trillion dollars we already owe. I don't think Big Pharma is all bad but they certainly deserve the reputation they have. It's stuff like this that feeds all the anti-BigPharma people. Drugs do have their place in treatment plans, even expensive drugs, but crap like this does more harm than good and these idiots don't seem to realize it. Part of the problem is that the drug companies are trying to screw the health insurance companies more than they are trying to screw people but not only does the trickle down effect reach most of us anyway, but innocent people wind up sometimes taking on the full brunt.

All of this wouldn't even be an issue if George W. Bush didn't sign Medicare Part-D Reform./en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medicare_Prescription_Drug,_Improvement,_and_Modernization_Act

It prevents the largest buyer of pharmaceuticals in the World (Medicare) from negotiating prices. That is the real issue, not a single drug being raised by 5000%. It's all the pharmaceutical companies being able to name their prices for their drugs. Macro vs Micro argument. If the largest buyer in the World could negotiate best pricing then it would trickle down to private insurance companies and end users.
Posted 9/22/2015 4:45 PM (GMT 0)
i just wanted to point out that while we all hate paying tons of money for our medications, we need to realize that we are fortunate enough they exist and that we can use them

if drug companies would not be able to charge a lot of money for the drugs it would not cover the billions in research (and for all the drugs that dont make it to the finish lines)
if they would lose money on making new drugs than why on earth would they try to make new drugs
that is the reason the 7 year patent is very important (in the states)
if the drug companies dont make money they dont make drugs and we suffer

also many of them offer patient assistance programs, you just need to ask
i get 10k from remicade a year (remistart)
Posted 9/22/2015 5:04 PM (GMT 0)
I think everyone's 'bul$hit' detector should be going off at full power on this guy. Especially when he claims the excess will go to R&D etc etc. Pure BS.

The truth is what they have done is exactly what Johnson & Johnson (Remicade etc) and others have done... They claim that the dramatic cost is to cover expenses, blah, blah blah and tout about the fact that they have programs to help fund those that cannot afford the drug and claim no one will go without it and so on.

The truth is they jack the price just like J&J did with Remicade and others because insurance and medicare covers it anyway - and deductible is passed on to the patient... then they have set up a 'charity fund' where the only doner is going to be the company itself. They 'donate' the drug to those without coverage and claim the full 'inflated' retail value of the drug back against their corporate tax on the obscene profits they make - effectively lowering or eliminating any corporate income tax due depending on their numbers.

All this can be be determined financially ahead of time on a drug based on average perception quantities.

By doing it this way they can make obscene profits, pay for 'donations' out of tax and claim that they are doing good.

I don't understand why the government does not clearly see this. It's a scam that has been going on for years in the drug industry.

----------

Here is the so called 'charity' for any interested: www.jjpaf.org/index.html - Click on 'about Us' and then click on 'Donor Companies' The only people involved in the 'donation' are Johnson and Johnson Companies.

This company, or kid really, is doing the identical thing.

I said on that curcumin post that somewhere along the lines things went really wrong in the pharma industry. This is what I meant.

Hopefully this guy will expose the issue itself by being a dumb@ss and going on TV and such. You don't see J&J going on TV. My guess is they hate him now. He's just a kid after all. Still wet behind the ears in the corporate word...

Post Edited (Canada Mark) : 9/22/2015 11:18:42 AM (GMT-6)

Posted 9/22/2015 5:12 PM (GMT 0)
Interestingly it appears Johnson and Johnson just re-did their whole website I linked to above over the last week cause I posted it on the Crohn's Board during a similar discussion and it worked fine. They removed the part where it specifically says "the only donors are Jenson (J&J) companies."

They replaced it with this misleading statement:

"about the Johnson & Johnson Patient Assistance Foundation

We are an independent, non-profit organization that is committed to helping patients get free prescription medications. Over the past 2 years, we have distributed 1.7 million units of medicine, helping over 270,000 people receive the medicines they need.

None of this would have been possible without the generosity of our donor companies, and for that we thank them: DePuy Synthes Mitek Sports Medicine, a division of DePuy Orthopaedics Inc.
Janssen Biotech Inc., Janssen Therapeutics, Division of Janssen Products LP, Janssen Pharamceuticals, Inc.

-------
All of these are simply J&J owned companies....
Posted 9/22/2015 5:36 PM (GMT 0)

Interesting it seems the foundation bought the rights to the drug back.

Found it on market watch as opposed to a health site.

Old Mike

It is actually a wallstreet journal article, but as you see healing well

is for some reason blocking out market watch, the site thinks it is some sort of offensive word,

like b-i-s-m-u-t-h.


Moderators can you fix this sort of thing.


LINK

http://www.marke***ch.com/story/nonprofit-buys-back-rights-to-tuberculosis-drug-after-sharp-price-hike-2015-09-22


Finally able to link I think.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/nonprofit-reacquires-rights-to-tuberculosis-drug-after-hefty-price-hike-1442879817



Post Edited (Old Mike) : 9/22/2015 11:54:12 AM (GMT-6)

Posted 9/22/2015 6:18 PM (GMT 0)
I wonder if this drug also squeezes into the rules that allows it to be marketed for conditions that it is not tested for due to being approved in early 1950s.

In 2012 similar happened to a drug that was used for IBD many years ago "The most important use of Acthar has been to treat infantile spasms, also known as West syndrome, a rare, sometimes fatal epileptic disorder that generally strikes before the age of 1.For several years, Questcor, which is based in Anaheim, lost money on Acthar because the drug’s market was so small. In 2007, it raised the price overnight, to more than $23,000 a vial, from $1,650, bringing the cost of a typical course of treatment for infantile spasms to above $100,000".

Recently, Questcor has aggressively marketed the drug to doctors treating other serious illnesses, including lupus, nephrotic syndrome and multiple sclerosis. It has done so without conducting extensive clinical trials proving Acthar is more effective for those diseases than other, far cheaper drugs, such as steroids. That is because Acthar was approved for use in 1952, before such trials were required by the F.D.A. and is essentially grandfathered inwww.nytimes.com/2014/07/11/business/questcor-reveals-adverse-events-data-for-acthar-for-first-time.html

Earlier story www.nytimes.com/2012/12/30/business/questcor-finds-profit-for-acthar-drug-at-28000-a-vial.html
Posted 9/22/2015 6:44 PM (GMT 0)
If we're going to go political, then I might as well toss in another opinion to think about.

If you're blaming the pharma companies, or a single piece of legislation, etc, then you're really missing the big picture: there simply is no market economy for healthcare, meaning existing pharma companies don't really go bankrupt, and it's near impossible for new companies to enter the industry.

Think about it this way: if you walked into your favorite local restaurant tomorrow and it turns out the greedy owner is now trying to scam his customers by charging $25 for his old $5 burger, all of his customers including you would leave, never come back, and he would be out of business before you could snap your fingers. You would be able to get your meal at one of the dozens of other restaurants in your area. Probably in a month a new restaurant by a new owner would be open in that location.

The modern day healthcare industry does not work like this. Decades and decades of laws and regulations have resulted in an overly complicated system where there is little competition, it's impossible to enter the industry, patients have little if any choice, and a tiny fraction of industry players were able to game the system and make out like bandits.

My two cents :)
Posted 9/22/2015 7:10 PM (GMT 0)

C Mark said...
Interestingly it appears Johnson and Johnson just re-did their whole website I linked to above over the last week cause I posted it on the Crohn's Board during a similar discussion and it worked fine. They removed the part where it specifically says "the only donors are Jenson (J&J) companies."

I don't understand why the government does not clearly see this. It's a scam that has been going on for years in the drug industry.

Congratulations, it sounds like you might have some clout. What Crohn's Board did you post it to, was it our HW forum? Or maybe it was just a coincidence that they changed their website.

Of course the government sees this. But they also see the generous campaign contributions to both Dems and Repubs in order to keep their mouths shut.
Posted 9/22/2015 7:29 PM (GMT 0)
One of the biggest problems with US healthcare is that it is a relatively small local network of monopolies, meaning you have close to zero choices. Your health insurance can often be a dictator in treatment options, the hell with the doctor. Many things are totally out of your control like when you go to an in network hospital only to find out that some of your in hospital providers are actually out of network. You are at their mercy and often get stuck holding the bag in disbelief. Now I'm not advocating having just one big bureaucratic government run single payer monopoly but there has to be a better way.
Posted 9/22/2015 7:46 PM (GMT 0)

Homer said...
If we're going to go political, then I might as well toss in another opinion to think about.

If you're blaming the pharma companies, or a single piece of legislation, etc, then you're really missing the big picture: there simply is no market economy for healthcare, meaning existing pharma companies don't really go bankrupt, and it's near impossible for new companies to enter the industry.

Think about it this way: if you walked into your favorite local restaurant tomorrow and it turns out the greedy owner is now trying to scam his customers by charging $25 for his old $5 burger, all of his customers including you would leave, never come back, and he would be out of business before you could snap your fingers. You would be able to get your meal at one of the dozens of other restaurants in your area. Probably in a month a new restaurant by a new owner would be open in that location.

The modern day healthcare industry does not work like this. Decades and decades of laws and regulations have resulted in an overly complicated system where there is little competition, it's impossible to enter the industry, patients have little if any choice, and a tiny fraction of industry players were able to game the system and make out like bandits.

My two cents :)

People get real upset when their medications are no longer made, especially if their lives depend on it. We are seeing that now with certain generic medication being discontinued. This isn't like a $5 Cheesburger and not many people care if the restaurant goes out of business.

There are lots of innovations and startup companies in the Biotech World (about 2,500 companies worldwide, www.statista.com/topics/1634/biotechnology-industry/), but most of their goals are to get bought up by the larger pharma companies because it costs so much for phase 2 & 3 trials and then manufacturing and marketing.
Posted 9/22/2015 8:31 PM (GMT 0)
Just coincidence. But on their previous website last week they were very clear about what it said. Now they changed the wording around a little and re-faced it.

@OM - I've often wondered how fast we'd progress if the whole medical industry was mandatory non-profit or something goofy like that - for the betterment of humanity type thing. Research and R&D would not suffer... there would still be ample funds.

It's nice to see a non-profit (or University in this case I believe) take action against it.

It's these fake 'patient assistance' programs that is where the corporate tax/medicare/insurance scam is found... Or loophole that let's them take advantage. It's a money making machine.

Good for Purdue for taking action. If I read the article correctly that drug company was in the middle of making their 'patient assistance' program (i.e tax scam) when Purdue said I don't think so... give the drug back to us. Good on them.

Post Edited (Canada Mark) : 9/22/2015 2:36:55 PM (GMT-6)

Posted 9/23/2015 12:41 AM (GMT 0)

Wait a minute I had the wrong drug, there must be a lot of this going on.

Here is what is going on with the correct drug now.

OM

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/drug-ceo-will-lower-price-daraprim-after-outrage-n431926

Posted 9/23/2015 2:00 AM (GMT 0)
It's been going on for years. I only looked into it years ago because when I first started Remicade I did not have coverage and I started to wonder why in the world this drug company was willing to give it to me for 'free' until I could get coverage.... it didn't add up. That was way back some 7 years ago maybe.

Here is an old article from and AIDS foundation about the same thing back in 2011: www.businesswire.com/news/home/20110802007295/en/Patient-Assistance-Scam----AIDS-Drug-Company#.VgIIP7QuJS8

I still say big pharma is going to make this kid 'disappear'... hahaha. At least people/government will start to learn about it and look into it now. Really it's the government that is taking a massive tax hit.

I think there is more to it that just the charity tax back scam part though cause they are all doing the very same thing for all their drugs and then claiming they are helping people and all that crap.
Posted 9/23/2015 2:01 AM (GMT 0)

ks1905 said...

Homer said...
If we're going to go political, then I might as well toss in another opinion to think about.

If you're blaming the pharma companies, or a single piece of legislation, etc, then you're really missing the big picture: there simply is no market economy for healthcare, meaning existing pharma companies don't really go bankrupt, and it's near impossible for new companies to enter the industry.

Think about it this way: if you walked into your favorite local restaurant tomorrow and it turns out the greedy owner is now trying to scam his customers by charging $25 for his old $5 burger, all of his customers including you would leave, never come back, and he would be out of business before you could snap your fingers. You would be able to get your meal at one of the dozens of other restaurants in your area. Probably in a month a new restaurant by a new owner would be open in that location.

The modern day healthcare industry does not work like this. Decades and decades of laws and regulations have resulted in an overly complicated system where there is little competition, it's impossible to enter the industry, patients have little if any choice, and a tiny fraction of industry players were able to game the system and make out like bandits.

My two cents :)

People get real upset when their medications are no longer made, especially if their lives depend on it. We are seeing that now with certain generic medication being discontinued. This isn't like a $5 Cheesburger and not many people care if the restaurant goes out of business.

There are lots of innovations and startup companies in the Biotech World (about 2,500 companies worldwide, www.statista.com/topics/1634/biotechnology-industry/), but most of their goals are to get bought up by the larger pharma companies because it costs so much for phase 2 & 3 trials and then manufacturing and marketing.

If it's too expensive for startup companies to regularly grow and compete with the big companies, then that's a barrier to entry and not a real, functional market. My belief is that the barrier is unintentionally created by complicated government regulations.
Posted 9/23/2015 7:33 PM (GMT 0)
UPDATE: In the news today this guy agreed to lower the price down to the point that they would only be making a "small" profit. He didn't say what that price would be but that it would be considerably lower than the $750.
Posted 9/23/2015 7:35 PM (GMT 0)
A "small" profit... sure.
I'm glad they're lowering the price, though.
✚ New Topic ✚ Reply