Drug Goes from $13.50 a Tablet to $750, Overnight • Hacker News Board

Re: Drug Goes from $13.50 a Tablet to $750, Overnight

#151

Post by odonnellryan » Mon, Sep 21, 2015, 2:33 PM UTC

thomnottom wrote: post #109

bedhead wrote: post #55

I am a fund manager and I have followed Martin Shkreli since his prior company, Retrophin, went public about two years ago. Simply put, Martin is a sociopathic criminal with a well-established, and consistent track record of deceit, recklessness, failure, and just plain old stupidity. But he is also hyper-aggressive. He is currently living in Switzerland, and it's my understanding that he fled the country in order to…

When I saw the headline I had a feeling it would be Turing. I was contacted by a recruiter last year and had a couple conversations about joining them as they were looking for an IT guy - the CIO was doing all of that work and they wanted someone else to be hands-on and eventually build a team. Sounded like a great opportunity and things were progressing. Then I bothered to Google them... Once I read up on Martin Shk…

How did they respond?

Re: Drug Goes from $13.50 a Tablet to $750, Overnight

#152

Post by danmaz74 » Mon, Sep 21, 2015, 2:35 PM UTC

paulmd wrote: post #142

danmaz74 wrote: post #59

> With the price now high, other companies could conceivably make generic copies, since patents have long expired. One factor that could discourage that option is that Daraprim’s distribution is now tightly controlled, making it harder for generic companies to get the samples they need for the required testing. > The switch from drugstores to controlled distribution was made in June by Impax, not by Turing. This is t…

In order to produce a generic, you need to prove that it has the same efficacy as the namebrand drug. It's not the same thing as a full FDA trial, it's small-scale and you're basically just proving that you're ending up with the same active ingredient and that it has the same effects in patients (i.e. you're not doing something differently in the formulation/delivery that's causing problems or impeding the efficacy o…

Thanks for the explanation. But this rule - ie, not allowing the competitor to buy the original product for testing - is incredibly anti-competitive and should be banned.

Re: Drug Goes from $13.50 a Tablet to $750, Overnight

#153

Post by ScottBev » Mon, Sep 21, 2015, 2:36 PM UTC

twoodfin wrote: post #128

ScottBev wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The cost to setup a process and maintain it according to FDA requirements. The market size is likely just under the cost to establish the manufacturing capacity for the US market.

And yet the "bad guy" generic manufacturer was able to raise the capital to do this (and presumably make a profit). What's the difference?

Turing only acquired the US marketing rights. Someone else is making the drug. So that doesn't change the FDA licensing, but they get to increase the price in the US.

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/turing-pharmaceutica...

Re: Drug Goes from $13.50 a Tablet to $750, Overnight

#154

Post by Brakenshire » Mon, Sep 21, 2015, 2:36 PM UTC

ams6110 wrote: post #58

JulianMorrison wrote: post #9

Drug creation needs to be nationalized, 100% tax funded all the way from researcher to trials to manufacture, and the drugs sold at cost thereafter. And the pharmaceuticals industry needs to just go away.

No, this will just make a bad problem worse. Overreaction in the extreme. There may be a need to look at enforcing some more openness to formulas and manufacturing process so that after patents expire it's less possible to maintain an exclusive on a generic. That is consistent with the intent of patent protection and encourages open markets and competition.

The Pharma industry does need to be relatively strictly regulated - for instance see the issues over withholding and bias in clinical research:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AllTrials

But, nationalizing the industry is impossible. We don't spend anywhere near enough on medical research for it to be possible. The UK government for instance spends about £500m a year on all medical research, even if you redirected all that money into clinical trials, you would be lucky to produce a handful of drugs each year.

Re: Drug Goes from $13.50 a Tablet to $750, Overnight

#155

Post by clavalle » Mon, Sep 21, 2015, 2:37 PM UTC

jerf wrote: post #146

clavalle wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps not more, but faster and perhaps more thoroughly in order to change the player's risk assessment. By the time these companies are called out they amass huge war chests and tie these things up in the courts for years while enriching their investors and management teams. Then, when the hammer falls, that company disintegrates on some level and, often, these management teams spread to similar companies and do it…

My point is "Let's write more regulations" is "let's keep things the same and hope it turns out better". It's easy to call for more regulations but it sounds a lot more to me like the core problem is a priority mismatch in enforcement. A lot harder to fix, but certainly step one seems to me to be to get people to stop calling for "more" regulation and start calling for the core problem of ineffective regulatory agenc…

I've seen these kinds of things up close (investigations and eventual prosecutions of exploitative companies in the health care sector) and I can absolutely tell you I am not pleased.

But I also don't see the alternative. I don't think a free market approach would work. The government has a huge standing war chest. It can afford to take the time and expense to go after these bad actors. Even insurance companies are rightfully reluctant to take on very expensive, risky litigation and/or investigation that could run into multiple years or even decades.

The market is a wonderful tool, but it can't solve all problems. Some problems are so big that it takes the pooled resources of, essentially, everyone to fight against it.

Re: Drug Goes from $13.50 a Tablet to $750, Overnight

#156

Post by Retric » Mon, Sep 21, 2015, 2:37 PM UTC

ctlby wrote: post #127

JulianMorrison wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It really isn't comparable. Computers are tools. Drugs are health. They are a public good and a natural human right. Holding people's health hostage is unacceptable whether you do it with a knife in an alley, or a capitalist health system. Mixing them up like the USA system does is a category error.

Drugs are a complex good created through the intensive efforts of highly intelligent, trained human beings. They are anything but a natural right.

Replace drug with aircraft and few people will say the military should be private.

Re: Drug Goes from $13.50 a Tablet to $750, Overnight

#157

Post by esarbe » Mon, Sep 21, 2015, 2:39 PM UTC

This is insane. But then again; the whole pharmaceuticals business is insane. Why again do we have a problem with antibiotics resistant bacteria? Because we stopped researching antibiotics in the 1970, because antibiotics weren't profitable anymore. (That, and the practice to feed antibiotics to our livestock to enhance growth, I guess.)

Research and trials shouldn't be done by the companies. Instead it should be done by the state, then companies should be able to bid on an exclusive contract to manufacture and sell the drug. The company that offers the lowest selling price gets the contract. After the exclusive period, it becomes a generic licensed drug, license feeds sponsor new research.

Don't know if that would work, but the current system is simply homicidal.

Re: Drug Goes from $13.50 a Tablet to $750, Overnight

#158

Post by daxelrod » Mon, Sep 21, 2015, 2:40 PM UTC

paulmd wrote: post #149

drzaiusapelord wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From an economic and policy perspective, unfortunately, Turing is doing everything right. Makena is probably not a great comparison as its used for prevent early birth, which is something of an edge case for certain pregnant women, versus Daraprim, which is a more common drug. It is the only FDA approved drug for Toxoplasmosis. According to wikipedia: Up to half of the world's population is infected with toxoplasmosi…

It's way down there in the article, but Turing's distributor (Impax) is tampering with the generic approval process. They use a controlled distribution strategy where you need to buy it directly from them, and they won't sell it to anyone who uses it for approval testing. Without the namebrand drug, there's no way to prove that your generic is equally efficacious, and thus no generic approvals and no competition.

Wow, this should be illegal. Thanks for pointing it out.

Re: Drug Goes from $13.50 a Tablet to $750, Overnight

#159

Post by bedhead » Mon, Sep 21, 2015, 2:42 PM UTC

drzaiusapelord wrote: post #140

bedhead wrote: post #55

I am a fund manager and I have followed Martin Shkreli since his prior company, Retrophin, went public about two years ago. Simply put, Martin is a sociopathic criminal with a well-established, and consistent track record of deceit, recklessness, failure, and just plain old stupidity. But he is also hyper-aggressive. He is currently living in Switzerland, and it's my understanding that he fled the country in order to…

From an economic and policy perspective, unfortunately, Turing is doing everything right. Makena is probably not a great comparison as its used for prevent early birth, which is something of an edge case for certain pregnant women, versus Daraprim, which is a more common drug. It is the only FDA approved drug for Toxoplasmosis. According to wikipedia: Up to half of the world's population is infected with toxoplasmosi…

I would disagree that many people are looking at this business plan with envy. CEO's of "real" pharma companies know this business model is possible, but no one bothers with it. I think this is partly out of ethical standards (yes, CEO's, even pharma CEO's, can possess this) and partly out of knowing the inevitable backlash makes it not worth it for the business and their personal reputation. Again, while KV isn't a perfect example, their brazenness ultimately bankrupted them, and most of the industry took note. So what you get is a process that only attracts extremely reckless and unethical people like Martin Shkreli, who unfortunately exist in this world. But there demonstrably are not 1,000 other guys trying to take Martin's place, he is an outlier.

Re: Drug Goes from $13.50 a Tablet to $750, Overnight

#160

Post by antr » Mon, Sep 21, 2015, 2:42 PM UTC

clavalle wrote: post #134

antr wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you say "cheaper" you mean to partialy subsidised services. I'm refering to tollroads, train networks, healthcare, pensions, etc. What you "pay" is not the real cost, but paid for in good part by the Government's budget.

I'm pretty sure they mean 'cheaper' as in 'lower total cost including that incurred by the government' not just 'the end consumer pays less'. It is strange that you seem to believe the free market is the only way to achieve efficiency.

From experience, yes. That's my understanding. I have worked on several transportation infrastructure projects, and now work in energy, and government-led projects (local, regional, national) tend to be more expensive (even if we include the repayment of debt) than private funded projects.