The sickness within Big Pharma: The US patent... - CLL Support

CLL Support

17,957 members29,446 posts

The sickness within Big Pharma

Indolent profile image

The US patent system was originally intended to protect the little guy from being trampled upon by a bigger and well funded competitor. In practice, it has moved quite a distance away from this concept. What it has become is a heavily abused monopoly that has allowed the rapacious Big Pharma companies to bilk billions from folks battling severe health conditions. The below opinion piece highlights two of their most abusive tactics.

usatoday.com/story/opinion/...

Keep in mind, that many of the ground breaking pharmaceutical discoveries originated in government funded programs.

9 Replies

As I’ve said before this is a very complicated issue. That being said, the overarching fact is the profitability of the drug companies drives innovation and advances in medicines. Curtailed profitability would reduce drug prices but it would also reduce the flow of life saving compounds to the market.

Benlewis profile image
Benlewis in reply to HopeME

I agree that profit drives innovation but the profit levels in some cases are obscene. Something must be done about this

LovecuresCLL profile image
LovecuresCLL in reply to HopeME

Agree but why do Americans pay more.,,, if not the lion’s share for this innovation? Then the Chinese reverse engineer the pills and walk all over our patents. We are paying for the worlds meds while our citizens are being bled dry. The blood sucking sound is from the leeches know as Big Pharma that attach to the skin of US patients. Leeches are alive and well while the patient is anemic. They are killing the host at this point.

in reply to LovecuresCLL

the chinese imbruvica for us already. 80 percent of prescription drugs in this used in this country are made overseas.

Great to bring this us. Our USA patent system is completely broken. The Chinese are beating us and file patents in our country and will later abuse us with our own system they went around for years especially in computer industry.

It is not protecting the little guy at all! You are correct!

Example Certain drugs for wrinkles that numbs muscles and begins with a B: why does FDA act as an arm of the drug company Allergex by preventing drugs manufactured by them in other countries from entering the USA for cheaper prices.

Mercantilism. Look that up. That’s why big pharma pushes FDA do its bidding in the guise of “protecting the public” from the same exact identical drugs they manufacture in Canada or UK for ALOT LESS.

FDA is willing to abide by whatever Allergex (not their real name) wants.

(I may end up in the trunk of my car for exposing this.)

But FDA goes around collecting up these bottles of wrinkle shots made by Allergex in other countries that were sold in the USA by dopey pharmacies in NY NJ CA and elsewhere that don’t realize that they stepped into a pile of 💩 . Same exact wrinkle drug for less folks made by same manufacturer in another country CHEAPER and not allowed to enter the USA.

Investigate that.

Follow the money, power and you will find corruption at the highest levels of our government with a ready willing and able FDA bureaucracy with their legions of agents doing the protectionism for a Big Pharma Company Allergex (not their real name).

Wise up America to how Big Pharma sucks every penny out of your bank account before it’s too late! PS wrinkle shots today and live-saving immunotherapy tomorrow!

AussieNeil profile image
AussieNeilAdministrator

Public companies are expected to maximise their value to their shareholders by all legal means. If they don't, they suffer the consequences. Private companies are also expected to return a profit to their owners unless not for profit. I worked for many years for a large, well respected US based public company and the shareholders always came first, but good employees were rewarded too. The company concerned also put priority into protecting its intellectual assets via the US patent system. I can't see how any reasonable person can object to the above provided the companies concerned use the patent system to stifle competition rather than growing new markets via cross licencing agreements - it's how we reward well run, innovative companies after all.

The issue is when companies use existing legislation and the patent system in ways it was not intended, where they lobby for government protection of their business model despite it being bad for people reliant on their products or services. The only way that can be countered is by making elected 'representatives' accountable to the general population - not business funded lobby groups. That involves pushing for change, so elected individuals and political parties are unable to be influenced in this way. You need transparency on any donations that can distort decision making away from doing the most good for the most people. Unfortunately if there is one thing for which you'll get bipartisan political support, it's on maintaining the system by which companies can legally influence legislative changes to their advantage by buying political favours - it's a problem in democracies throughout the world. At least in the USA, you have a free and independent press and you can vote out representatives that aren't. Can you prove you have the world's greatest democracy? en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dem... A good start would indeed be long overdue changes to the patent system, so that it does what was initially intended. The USA has law firms that exist purely for the purpose of buying up patents and using patent ownership to stifle innovation!

Neil

Makes sense. Last sentence you stated seems to be the key to the whole thing. Patent system is broken and companies exploit that broken system.

the US patent system for prescription drugs has been revised several times over the last 50 years

You may also like...