5 ms·

I think medical-related crimes are very different. Especially when they directly affect patients. Few people have gotten away with fraud on the cash side in thi

I think medical-related crimes are very different. Especially when they directly affect patients. Few people have gotten away with fraud on the cash side in this industry though. Valeant Phamaceuticals. Shkreli

csomar 8y ago
> Few people have gotten away with fraud on the cash side in this industry though. Valeant Phamaceuticals. Shkreli I don't think Shkreli was defrauding regarding his pharmaceutical practices. (though he has security charges). He was using shady practices that were totally legal. Completely different game.
- dnautics 8y ago
  Also iirc the shkreli case is strange since no one actually suffered any damages.
  - csomar 8y ago
    According to him (in an interview) he only jacked the prices up for insurance companies.
    - telchar 8y ago
      Which makes every single person with insurance a (diffuse) victim. Let's not pretend that exorbitant pricing doesn't have any relation to the high cost of medical insurance/care, which in turn of course indirectly kills people.
      - csomar 8y ago
        Drop the tone. All I said is his pharmaceutical practices were 1. legal 2. didn't have direct effect on the consumers of the medicines. Skherli said he gave the medicine free to those who have no insurance. I don't think by good heart but rather to avoid a major bad publicity from the inability of non-insured to pay.
        telchar 8y ago
        I won't. The notion that Shkreli did next to nothing wrong because he only gouged insurance companies is one I have seen echoed too much. It bears refuting when it comes up lest people see such assertions go unchallenged and don't consider the implications.
        dnautics 8y ago
        Shkreli is not in jail for that. The "shkreli case" specifically refers to a securities case, unrelated to retrophin. And it is that, specifically, where there were no damages.
    - dnautics 8y ago
      specifically referring to the securities case. He's not in jail for manipulating the price of pharmaceuticals.

csomar 8y ago

> Few people have gotten away with fraud on the cash side in this industry though. Valeant Phamaceuticals. Shkreli I don't think Shkreli was defrauding regarding his pharmaceutical practices. (though he has security charges). He was using shady practices that were totally legal. Completely different game.

dnautics 8y ago
Also iirc the shkreli case is strange since no one actually suffered any damages.
- csomar 8y ago
  According to him (in an interview) he only jacked the prices up for insurance companies.
  - telchar 8y ago
    Which makes every single person with insurance a (diffuse) victim. Let's not pretend that exorbitant pricing doesn't have any relation to the high cost of medical insurance/care, which in turn of course indirectly kills people.
    - csomar 8y ago
      Drop the tone. All I said is his pharmaceutical practices were 1. legal 2. didn't have direct effect on the consumers of the medicines. Skherli said he gave the medicine free to those who have no insurance. I don't think by good heart but rather to avoid a major bad publicity from the inability of non-insured to pay.
      - telchar 8y ago
        I won't. The notion that Shkreli did next to nothing wrong because he only gouged insurance companies is one I have seen echoed too much. It bears refuting when it comes up lest people see such assertions go unchallenged and don't consider the implications.
        dnautics 8y ago
        Shkreli is not in jail for that. The "shkreli case" specifically refers to a securities case, unrelated to retrophin. And it is that, specifically, where there were no damages.
  - dnautics 8y ago
    specifically referring to the securities case. He's not in jail for manipulating the price of pharmaceuticals.