Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Amazon buys PillPack, an online pharmacy, for just under $1B

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 333 posts

Re: Amazon buys PillPack, an online pharmacy, for just under $1B

#251

Post by jhall1468 »

vernie wrote: post #236
jeherr wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a very ill-informed opinion. The supply chain is very strictly regulated for pharmaceutical medications. Do you really think that Amazon can get their stock medications from just anyone? Do you think there is no oversight on this kind of thing? The DEA doesn't fuck around. They take all of this stuff very seriously. Commingling medications? Really? In a pharmacy, medications are NEVER allowed to be commingled…

That kind of "innovation" is just what I've come to expect from Amazon.

What part of heavily regulated is hard to understand? The Amazon Marketplace is regulated by Amazon. Pharmaceuticals are regulated by the FDA.

Re: Amazon buys PillPack, an online pharmacy, for just under $1B

#252

Post by qop »

jeherr wrote: post #229
tombrossman wrote: post #18

This is interesting because Amazon isn't exactly known for supply chain integrity. Who here hasn't received fakes from Amazon? If you rely on a specific medication for your health, is Amazon a brand you trust to deliver it? How long until they start commingling pills and shipping random counterfeit/fake product to users? Hope it never happens but if they do with pharmaceuticals what they did with everything else they…

This is a very ill-informed opinion. The supply chain is very strictly regulated for pharmaceutical medications. Do you really think that Amazon can get their stock medications from just anyone? Do you think there is no oversight on this kind of thing? The DEA doesn't fuck around. They take all of this stuff very seriously. Commingling medications? Really? In a pharmacy, medications are NEVER allowed to be commingled…

Clearly the parent commenter didn't intend to imply that the industry is not regulated. I think it was more of a tongue-in-cheek jab at Amazon.

I think it's just generally weird that a shipping and commerce company is taking interest in pharma to begin with. I think it SHOULD make users uncomfortable that a single company is potentially exposed to all these different vertices of user information. They know what you buy, soon they'll know what groceries people buy, what they read, what medicine they take which could in turn reveal metadata like sexual habits or genetic patterns.

It's weird.

Re: Amazon buys PillPack, an online pharmacy, for just under $1B

#254

Post by dmix »

nwcs wrote: post #247

There are some interesting security issues in the underlying systems that pharmacies like PillPack use. Here is a security advisory for PillPack from 2015: https://wwws.nightwatchcybersecurity.com/2015/04/30/advisory... Basically the system that pharmacies used to transfer prescriptions isn't secure

You're basing this off a 3yr old security review of a 2yr old startup (at the time: founded in 2013, reviewed in 2015)? Got anything more recent? 3yrs is a lifetime in startup years.

Plus they now have plenty of money to hire the best security firms to pen test their systems, plug holes, and run a serious monitoring operation.

Re: Amazon buys PillPack, an online pharmacy, for just under $1B

#255

Post by brandonmenc »

dkresge wrote: post #249

Is the physical volume of the average pill predominantly "active ingredient"? If not, why not just "print" a single pill per customer-dose comprised of the prescribed constituents?

For some pills, not even close. This is why you can't just split any old pill and expect a partial dose.

Re: Amazon buys PillPack, an online pharmacy, for just under $1B

#257

Post by jeherr »

not_kurt_godel wrote: post #250
beenBoutIT wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the modern world medicines come in pre-counted blister packs where there is zero room for error. Here in America we have to wait around an hour for some dolt to count and then double count the pills.

It is pretty remarkable how inefficient getting pills from a pharmacist is. The actual dispensing could be easily handled by a glorified vending machine so all the pharmacist would have to do is punch some buttons on a computer instead of having to physically handle anything except dumping packages from the manufacturer in it upon delivery.

Actually, some pharmacies do have counting robots now which count out their most commonly filled prescriptions, like norco. They’re not perfect though.

Re: Amazon buys PillPack, an online pharmacy, for just under $1B

#258

Post by djrogers »

beenBoutIT wrote: post #248
mschuster91 wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When a prescriptions for a schedule II drug is filled, the pharmacy technician has to count the number of pills being filled twice. Then the pharmacist has to count the number of pills, and then backcount the stock bottle to make sure everything is kosher and no pills are missing. Good grace. What a load of unnecessary bureaucracy.

In the modern world medicines come in pre-counted blister packs where there is zero room for error. Here in America we have to wait around an hour for some dolt to count and then double count the pills.

That's dramatically overblown and incorrect (and rather insulting to trained professionals whom you apparently know nothing about). Many perscription drigs do come in blister packs in the US, but you may not have seen them because it's generally only the ones that are nearly always perscribed in the same amount - a Zithromax Z-Pack for example.

Any other medication coming in blister packs wouldn't change a darned thing, unless you expect pharmacies to carry large quantities of sealed 5,10,15,20 etc etc dose packs. If they didn't, they'd still be breaking the sealed packs up and counting to match the perscribed amount.

Re: Amazon buys PillPack, an online pharmacy, for just under $1B

#259

Post by jeherr »

jhall1468 wrote: post #251
vernie wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That kind of "innovation" is just what I've come to expect from Amazon.

What part of heavily regulated is hard to understand? The Amazon Marketplace is regulated by Amazon. Pharmaceuticals are regulated by the FDA.

Not just the FDA, but also the DEA and the states Board of Pharmacy.

Re: Amazon buys PillPack, an online pharmacy, for just under $1B

#260

Post by digitalzombie »

qop wrote: post #252
jeherr wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a very ill-informed opinion. The supply chain is very strictly regulated for pharmaceutical medications. Do you really think that Amazon can get their stock medications from just anyone? Do you think there is no oversight on this kind of thing? The DEA doesn't fuck around. They take all of this stuff very seriously. Commingling medications? Really? In a pharmacy, medications are NEVER allowed to be commingled…

Clearly the parent commenter didn't intend to imply that the industry is not regulated. I think it was more of a tongue-in-cheek jab at Amazon. I think it's just generally weird that a shipping and commerce company is taking interest in pharma to begin with. I think it SHOULD make users uncomfortable that a single company is potentially exposed to all these different vertices of user information. They know what you b…

Is it weird?

I feel like it's more like Amazon just trying to monopolize everything. There are articles out there talking about getting Amazon-ed. Where Amazon would go in your industry and dominate you out the market. (https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamescahn/2018/04/24/dont-let-y...)

This is just a natural thing or the thing that Amazon does. Their modus operandi.

> what medicine they take which could in turn reveal metadata like sexual habits

They do recommendation system and I believe they sell sex toys so yeah... Alexia knows your kink already.

It's not weird but I think the better question is is this okay for one company to have so much power in so many area. Or at least I believe that's what you are trying to convey.

Post reply on HN