6 ms·

Big Pharma Abusing Patent Laws To Seize And Destroy Legal Indian Generic Drugs

23 points by aj 17y ago

param 17y ago
Too short an article to form any real conclusions. No direct quotes from big pharma, no links to news about such confiscations. Waste of 2 mins.
- jacquesm 17y ago
  What kind of quotes were you looking for ? "Yes, we did that ?" I hope the wsj is good enough for you: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124949598103308449.html http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124949598103308449.html (google cache entry of the same link because of silly restrictions): http://74.125.77.132/search?q=cache:KQdnCYpa9HgJ:online.wsj.com/article/SB124949598103308449.html+india+eu+trade+complaint+generic+drugs&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&client=firefox-a http://74.125.77.132/search?q=cache:KQdnCYpa9HgJ:online.wsj....
  - param 17y ago
    There was a note about someone alleging the drugs were counterfeit. There could have been more details around that - who alleged it and why? Note that I am not siding with big pharma here - far from it. I am siding with balanced reporting.
streety 17y ago
"India has a legal and thriving generic drug market that was built up initially via a ban on pharma patents in India (which, as an aside, shows again that a ban on patents can actually help create a thriving industry)." Personally I would be looking for evidence of a thriving industry in novel therapeutics, rather than generics, before considering everything hunky dory after a ban.
- jacquesm 17y ago
  Generics are a way of showing that the price of something is not related to its actual cost. Big Pharma uses their 'research costs money' argument to counter this, but they forget - conveniently - to mention that they spend a very large multiple of their expenses on research for the marketing department. They abuse the patent system left, right and center in order to extend the income from so called 'blockbuster' drugs at the expense of doing something innovative for a smaller group of people. Generics wouldn't stand a chance if it weren't for the price gouging going on.
  - streety 17y ago
    I'm not saying the current system in US/Europe is efficient or even acceptable but it is a model that has produced novel therapeutics in the past. I think we can agree that the price is too high but hopefully we can also agree that benefits have been gained from those novel therapeutics. I got the impression that the article was generally anti-patents and I framed my response in that context. A ban on patents has been beneficial for the generics industry but if it has a higher cost in terms of stifling novel therapeutics, which also have a benefit, then it may be an overall loss for the population as a whole. In this way there is little difference between a ban on patents being good for the generics industry and strong copyright laws being good for the record industry. Both may be true but the interests of the population may not be aligned perfectly with these industries. On the other hand if research into novel therapeutics is able to thrive with a ban on patents then you get the benefits of new therapies and the affordable prices. This is what I would like to see before dismissing the patent system entirely when what may be best is a little tweaking. Finally on marketing versus R&D I'm not sure that the multiple could genuinely said to be 'very large.' This article suggests marketing:R&D is 2:1. http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pmed.0050001 http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal...
    - jacquesm 17y ago
      Off label promotion, ghost writing and so called 'promotional' meetings were not included in that study. That may seem like a little bit until you realize that there are roughly 500,000 such meetings annually (2008). The spendings in that article account for only (roughly) 40% of total expenditure.
gdee 17y ago
Interesting link in one of the comments. OT but relevant to the business practices of Big Pharma: http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20090809231252693 http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20090809231252693
deleted 17y ago
[deleted]
kristiandupont 17y ago
"Abusing" the patent laws? Isn't this exactly what these laws were made for? Not that I am defending Big Pharma, but the generic producers are profiting on research that they did not fund. It has a number of good effects sure, but I can understand why there are powers that find this unacceptable and want to stop it.
jcl 17y ago
Despite the many problems with Big Pharma, the EU's action seems reasonable to me... If you want to ship something that is illegal in the EU, there's no reason to expect it to pass through EU ports unimpeded.
- deleted 17y ago
  [deleted]

23 points by aj 17y ago

param 17y ago

Too short an article to form any real conclusions. No direct quotes from big pharma, no links to news about such confiscations. Waste of 2 mins.

jacquesm 17y ago
What kind of quotes were you looking for ? "Yes, we did that ?" I hope the wsj is good enough for you: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124949598103308449.html http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124949598103308449.html (google cache entry of the same link because of silly restrictions): http://74.125.77.132/search?q=cache:KQdnCYpa9HgJ:online.wsj.com/article/SB124949598103308449.html+india+eu+trade+complaint+generic+drugs&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&client=firefox-a http://74.125.77.132/search?q=cache:KQdnCYpa9HgJ:online.wsj....
- param 17y ago
  There was a note about someone alleging the drugs were counterfeit. There could have been more details around that - who alleged it and why? Note that I am not siding with big pharma here - far from it. I am siding with balanced reporting.

streety 17y ago

"India has a legal and thriving generic drug market that was built up initially via a ban on pharma patents in India (which, as an aside, shows again that a ban on patents can actually help create a thriving industry)." Personally I would be looking for evidence of a thriving industry in novel therapeutics, rather than generics, before considering everything hunky dory after a ban.

jacquesm 17y ago
Generics are a way of showing that the price of something is not related to its actual cost. Big Pharma uses their 'research costs money' argument to counter this, but they forget - conveniently - to mention that they spend a very large multiple of their expenses on research for the marketing department. They abuse the patent system left, right and center in order to extend the income from so called 'blockbuster' drugs at the expense of doing something innovative for a smaller group of people. Generics wouldn't stand a chance if it weren't for the price gouging going on.
- streety 17y ago
  I'm not saying the current system in US/Europe is efficient or even acceptable but it is a model that has produced novel therapeutics in the past. I think we can agree that the price is too high but hopefully we can also agree that benefits have been gained from those novel therapeutics. I got the impression that the article was generally anti-patents and I framed my response in that context. A ban on patents has been beneficial for the generics industry but if it has a higher cost in terms of stifling novel therapeutics, which also have a benefit, then it may be an overall loss for the population as a whole. In this way there is little difference between a ban on patents being good for the generics industry and strong copyright laws being good for the record industry. Both may be true but the interests of the population may not be aligned perfectly with these industries. On the other hand if research into novel therapeutics is able to thrive with a ban on patents then you get the benefits of new therapies and the affordable prices. This is what I would like to see before dismissing the patent system entirely when what may be best is a little tweaking. Finally on marketing versus R&D I'm not sure that the multiple could genuinely said to be 'very large.' This article suggests marketing:R&D is 2:1. http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pmed.0050001 http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal...
  - jacquesm 17y ago
    Off label promotion, ghost writing and so called 'promotional' meetings were not included in that study. That may seem like a little bit until you realize that there are roughly 500,000 such meetings annually (2008). The spendings in that article account for only (roughly) 40% of total expenditure.

gdee 17y ago

Interesting link in one of the comments. OT but relevant to the business practices of Big Pharma: http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20090809231252693 http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20090809231252693

deleted 17y ago

[deleted]

kristiandupont 17y ago

"Abusing" the patent laws? Isn't this exactly what these laws were made for? Not that I am defending Big Pharma, but the generic producers are profiting on research that they did not fund. It has a number of good effects sure, but I can understand why there are powers that find this unacceptable and want to stop it.

jcl 17y ago

Despite the many problems with Big Pharma, the EU's action seems reasonable to me... If you want to ship something that is illegal in the EU, there's no reason to expect it to pass through EU ports unimpeded.

deleted 17y ago
[deleted]