Drug Company To Pay Just $15.4 Million Over Doctor Bribery Scandal Involving Medicine That Brings in $1 Billion a Year (gizmodo.com) 114
Mallinckrodt Pharmaceuticals announced this week that the company expects to pay $15.4 million in a settlement with the U.S. Justice Department after allegations that Questcor Pharmaceuticals, which Mallinckrodt acquired in 2014, had bribed doctors and their staff to prescribe an incredibly expensive drug. From a report: Two whistleblowers came forward in April to accuse Questcor of trying to boost profits for Acthar, a medication primarily for infants with seizures. Questcor raised the price of the medication by almost 100,000 percent (not a typo) from just $40 in 2000 to $38,892 today, despite the fact that Acthar has been on the market since 1952. Mallinckrodt currently rakes in about $1 billion per year from Acthar, according to CNN.
They're the ruling elite (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: They're the ruling elite (Score:1)
Unless it is with a guillotine. It's too good for them in this case - start at the other end and go in 6-inch sections.
Thanks, I don't want to become *them* (Score:1)
Comments like are proof that we are *not even* still in the dark ages, but still in the times before the teachings that we now know as Jesus' have reached the general/public!
Seriously ... HOW do you not get that this make you exactly as evil who you are "punishing"?
Do you really believe there is *any* reasoning you could use to justify such horrors, that your victim, the original perpetrator, could not use with exactly the same validity?
(Because in that case it's only you believing that.)
I don't wanna pick
Re: (Score:1)
We can do better than torture.
It's not that difficult, particularly in this situation, to do good and only good while still discouraging this kind of behavior. For example, the fine could be made as large or larger than profits the offense generated and recompense made to patients who were given unnecessary prescriptions. A big one: They could have their patent on the product rescinded.
Vengeance isn't justice.
If atheism is to claim the moral high ground, then atheists need to offer a morality at least a
Re: (Score:1)
Maybe, as a result of this news story, there will be a class-action lawsuit. Maybe it will hit them for a large enough sum to actually punish them for what they have done.
Of course, with this news being in circulation, huge masses of people should stand up and protest and boycott and apply political pressure to ensure that these monsters are properly punished. But we never do. We just put up with this sort of thing. And that is why this sort of thing keeps happening.
Everyone would love to see them punis
Re: They're the ruling elite (Score:1)
The invisible hand (Score:1)
Feels great in your small intestine
Written off as.... (Score:5, Interesting)
.... the cost of doing corrupt business
Re: Written off as.... (Score:5, Interesting)
I feel like these punishments should be loss of patents, percentage of annual income for each year during the scandal. This is not even as bad as sending a child to timeout
Re: Written off as.... (Score:1)
Re:Written off as.... (Score:5, Interesting)
.... the cost of doing corrupt business
pretty sure there's a tax deduction for these "expenses"
Re: Written off as.... (Score:1)
Patent expired? (Score:4, Interesting)
despite the fact that Acthar has been on the market since 1952
So how come no other companies are making this drug for $40? That patent should have been expried a long time ago...
Re: (Score:1, Interesting)
How many infants have seizures? Of those, how many patients actually saw the bill and asked if there was an alternative? Of those, how many had doctors that were not accepting the bribe?
From the summary, I would guess the answer to the last question is "two".
This is the best argument for pushing insurance and the government out of healthcare. Someone feeling $40,000 of pain for a $40 drug will be motivated to find an alternative. (That statement carries an implicit [and not necessarily accurate] assumpt
Re:Patent expired? (Score:5, Insightful)
Someone feeling $40,000 of pain for a $40 drug will be motivated to find an alternative.
Pharmacist: "I'm sorry, there is no generic or alternative to that drug. No drug company is willing to assume the legal liability for making the drug that, in most cases, will save your child's life, but in a few, select cases will cause serious side effects or even just not work. Too many lawyers would flock to the few, seeking millions in profit, and $40 per dose would not cover the legal expenses for that. You need to remember, the cost of actually making the pill is not the only cost involved in today's hyper-litigious society."
Re: Patent expired? (Score:5, Insightful)
To me it's the best argument for *any* single payer plan, whether it's individual or government run.
Of course the problem with individuals paying is that they may not be able to pay for it. And sometimes by the time you prove you do have money its too late to start some kinds of care (such as emergencies).
First world countries have "solved" this problem by requiring such emergency care to be given to anyone without requiring them to prove that they can pay. Enlightened first world countries have realized that only paying for emergency care is actually more expensive than completely paying for all healthcare (emergencies are more expensive than prevention), so they let the government be the single payer and then just cover everybody.
Of course if there is a way to tell immediately whether someone is able and willing to pay (possibly by borrowing our making some other arrangement), even if that person is unconscious, has pieces missing, etc. then you can stop covering everyone's emergency care and just leave those who can't pay to their own devices. At that point individual payer becomes practical again, and the poor can be left to die in ditches as they did in ye good olde days.
Re: (Score:3)
I've seen a few cases wher
Re: (Score:2)
So if you move both government and insurance out of healthcare who takes over? Seriously, who would you trust to do oversight of healthcare? The doctors themselves? I'm sure that wouldn't bring up problems.
Without insurance how do people pay for healthcare? Do you just hope you never get sick? Hope that the $5-$1000 you put away each month covers any medical problems that arise?
Without government involvement who makes sure the drugs that are on the market are safe?
Re:Patent expired? (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes. BioSim makes it. But this is a perfect example on how frequently the free markets fail and why we need government regulation.
This is yet another example how we little people are being screwed and the system is rigged. The only people pushing me to be a socialist are the capitalists. I will never be a dyed-in-the-wool socialist because I actually know what it is and all the subsequent problems, but I am very sympathetic to adding a dash of Socialism to our economy as Western European capitalist countries have done - there are no Socialist countries in Western Europe. Lots of social safety nets, but not Socialist in the truest definition.
Although, the pundits on Fox News consider them all to be Soviet or some such nonsense because they are all idiots and their audience are old senile decrepit morons.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes. BioSim makes it. But this is a perfect example on how frequently the free markets fail and why we need government regulation.
The market hasn't failed here because the market is not operating. Although Mallinckrodt does not have a patent on this compound, it has an exclusive, government-granted right to import it into the US as though it were still patented. Scrap the import controls and let us fill our prescriptions through Amazon.
Re: (Score:2)
Although Mallinckrodt does not have a patent on this compound, it has an exclusive, government-granted right to import it into the US as though it were still patented.
If it is out of patent, then any company that wants to can make it in the US and there is nothing to do with import involved.
Scrap the import controls and let us fill our prescriptions through Amazon.
You might as well argue that we just scrap the FDA altogether, since they would have no control over the imports and you don't know who, if anyone, does sanity check the products.
Re:Patent expired? (Score:5, Informative)
So how come no other companies are making this drug for $40? That patent should have been expried a long time ago...
From TFA:
"Curiously, thereâ(TM)s a drug called Synacthen thatâ(TM)s identical to Acthar and sells for just $33 in Canada. So why isnâ(TM)t Synacthen available in the U.S.? Because Mallinckrodt bought the U.S. rights to Synacthen and simply doesnâ(TM)t make it available to American consumers."
More generally there has been systematic illegal collusion between generic drug manufacturers to maximize profit while US regulators and law enforcement have been effectively captured by industry.
Re: Patent expired? (Score:4, Insightful)
What shit are you talking about?
Are you saying that there was another President besides Trump who demanded that the British put there NHS on the table to be open to privatization by US health care providers? You know them. They're the ones who have us paying double the cost of the rest of the top tier nations.
I call bullshit.
Re: (Score:2)
The poor are jailed for minor offenses, corporations are slapped on the wrist (if at all) for major criminal activity. The CEO, directors, legal departments, etc. are all complicit in shit like this, bu
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
well I guess it's been tested against replacements.
who the drug company promptly buys rights for and buries them.
Re: Patent expired? (Score:2)
Yes. There are lots of costs.
1. Cost of bribing doctors.
2. Cost of buying the rights to an alternative treatment and taking it off the market.
3. Cost of bonuses for the clever guys who came up with this scheme.
4. Cost of penalties for getting caught.
Of course Mallincoft also dispenses millions doses of its generic formula of Norco.
I'm sure their team never would push higher usage of it. Knowing what we know now about opioid use.
I mean if you don't mind squeezing sick babies for a billion or two exactly wher
Re: (Score:2)
So how come no other companies are making this drug for $40? That patent should have been expried a long time ago...
They do, all over the world. But you can't buyit in the US for the world price, because Mallinckrod has an exclusive right to sell here, granted by the FDA.
It's time to strip the FDA of its power to keep products off the market. Let the agency confine itself to being the gold standard of testing, and let patients and doctors decide whether they wish to trust the FDA alone, or the approvals of European and Asian equivalents of the US price is too high.
Re: (Score:2)
Mallinckrod has an exclusive right to sell here, granted by the FDA.
Because nobody else has bothered to make an approved version.
Your statement is like saying that XYZ Auto Body Shop as a government granted monopoly for auto repair in Smokboken, AK because nobody else has applied for a business license to do that.
It's time to strip the FDA of its power to keep products off the market.
Let's bring back thalidomide! No controls. Wild west. I got some nice tonic that will cure you of the rheumatism and gout and goiter and malais...
and let patients and doctors decide whether they wish to trust the FDA alone, or the approvals of European and Asian equivalents of the US price is too high.
That assumes there is some power the FDA has to keep stuff not approved by "European and Asian equivalents" out of th
Re: (Score:2)
Other manufacturers RE making the compound - just not in the US. This is the situation with many other products, but we can freely import them. Pharma has a special right to prevent such competition from cutting into their business.
And no, MDs are not suddenly going to start prescribing thalidomide to pregnant women if they gain the ability to write prescriptions on the world market. Testing of compounds goes on as it does now, just not the coercive market manipulation. It's time to keep the FDA in its lane
Re: (Score:2)
Other manufacturers RE making the compound - just not in the US.
Not in the US means not under the US patent system. Once the patent is gone, others can make it in the US, too.
And no, MDs are not suddenly going to start prescribing thalidomide to pregnant women
I guess I shouldn't have been that specific in mentioning a possible returning drug. Imagine any other drug that has fallen into disrepute or disfavor because it has side effects.
As for "MDs not prescribing", once you get to the overseas market of drugs, you fall under the overseas MD market, too. Overseas MDs, paid by the overseas "drug" company, will happily prescribe anything they get paid to
Re: (Score:2)
The problem isn't that the drugs aren't approved for use in the US the problem is that the drug companies buy the exclusive rights to distribute the drugs in the US and then don't offer them for sale. This way they can sell their drug at high markup and eliminate any would be competitors.
Re:Where is the generic (Score:4, Insightful)
From TFA:
Curiously, there’s a drug called Synacthen that’s identical to Acthar and sells for just $33 in Canada. So why isn’t Synacthen available in the U.S.? Because Mallinckrodt bought the U.S. rights to Synacthen and simply doesn’t make it available to American consumers.
Re: (Score:2)
Here's the important part of the settlement that is much more important than the fine:
In addition to the $100 million monetary payment, the proposed stipulated court order requires that Questcor grant a license to develop Synacthen Depot to treat infantile spasms and nephrotic syndrome to a licensee approved by the Commission.
A monitor will ensure that Questcor complies with its obligation to grant the license within 120 days of the entry of the order; after that time, a trustee will be appointed to effectuate the license. The order also requires Questcor to provide periodic reports on its efforts, and provide the Commission with advance notice of any future acquisitions of U.S. rights to ACTH drugs.
Oh hey, a settlement! (Score:2)
That's a wholly deductible tax write-off, there! :D
Others (Score:2, Informative)
In my line of work we use isoproterenol, a beta agonist. Used to run about $25/ampule. About 5 years ago it soared to $1500. My pharmacists had said it wasn't entirely, or even mostly, a greed thing. Part of it was some new FDA regulations that had come down and manufacturers were not about to absorb that cost when they could pass it off on the customer (can't say I blame them!).
I don't buy that at all (Score:5, Insightful)
In my line of work we use isoproterenol, a beta agonist. Used to run about $25/ampule. About 5 years ago it soared to $1500. My pharmacists had said it wasn't entirely, or even mostly, a greed thing. Part of it was some new FDA regulations that had come down and manufacturers were not about to absorb that cost when they could pass it off on the customer
I'm highly skeptical of that, and require a better citation than "I heard from a friend/pharamcist, who..." (insert REO Speedwagon Lyrics here).
This strikes me as a very self-serving meme from a corrupt industry:
1. Hike prices outrageously by exploiting a privileged, monopoly position (usually as a result of government granted monopoly entitlements, more commonly referred to as patents)
2. When you get called out, blame those dirty regulators in Washington. This has the nice effect of (a) deflecting responsibility from the guilty party to a faceless government bureaucracy and (b) manipulating public opinion to demand LESS regulation of a corrupt industry that clearly needs MUCH, MUCH MORE said regulation.
It's diabolically clever, difficult to prove, and imho far more likely to be true than your pharmacist's rather suspect "explanation." It's a fairly common PR pattern used in a lot of industries these days, and I suspect big pharma is no exception.
Re: (Score:2)
(usually as a result of government granted monopoly entitlements, more commonly referred to as patents)
Isoproterenol is available in generic form, thus the "greedy bastard monopoly patents" aren't actually a cause.
(b) manipulating public opinion to demand LESS regulation of a corrupt industry that clearly needs MUCH, MUCH MORE said regulation.
You think there needs to be MORE regulation from the FDA which would slow down the release of generics even more than it already does, to solve the problem of not enough brands and forms for certain drugs? "Just one more regulation" is seldom the solution to anything.
Re: (Score:2)
Don't blame patents. The drug in question is not under patent, having been synthesized first in the 1950's. Patents only last 20 years.
Re:Others (Score:5, Informative)
Nope. No new regulations. just the usual pharmabro nonsense. [eplabdigest.com]. A google search regarding FDA regulations and this topic turns up FDA manipulations, but no legitimate regulation that would lead to long-term price increases. Not only did you get bro'd, it sounds like you were deceived too.
Re: (Score:2)
Your pharmacist was wrong. Interestingly, the "expensive new regulations" happened right after all rights to sell the drug were bought out and nobody seems to know what those "regulations" might be. Not at all coincidentally, the same story seems to apply to most if not all of the drugs that have seen sudden spikes in price in the last few years.
They hiked the price because they could.
WTF (Score:2)
Who the fuck can afford $38,892 medication? Questcor are a bunch of assholes.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:WTF (Score:5, Interesting)
I had a coworker whose wife was diagnosed with a very rare form of leukemia.
She went through chemotherapy, but was also informed that even if the drugs and her immune system beat the cancer back into remission, it would come back.
It turns out her leukemia was caused by a virus that had transcribed its genetic code into one of her immune cells, and it was causing the cancer.
Some brilliant researchers had discovered how to kill the virus, though, and that drug was available to keep the cancer from coming back.
For the measly price of only a couple hundred thousand dollars a year.
Which her health insurance company refused to pay.
So she was stuck with the Russian Roulette choice of not paying for the drug and having the leukemia come back, or spending money she and her family didn't have to live.
Their solution?
My coworker took a job in Toronto and they all moved to Canada, where the drug is (a) a lot cheaper because the drug company can't just charge whatever they want, and (b) covered by Canadian Medicare.
Re:WTF (Score:4, Interesting)
My coworker took a job in Toronto and they all moved to Canada, where the drug is (a) a lot cheaper because the drug company can't just charge whatever they want, and (b) covered by Canadian Medicare.
Canada has no magical power to force foreign companies to sell for less. It just saves by buying in bulk at the global price. If US insurance companies and government health programs could legally do the same, they would save too.
Re: (Score:2)
It's not a 'magical' power, it is a matter of negotiation. Take the offer or take nothing and we'll have someone else make the drug.
As opposed to the American method: "Really? water's $10,000 per pint? Gee whiz, I sure wish we could just fill these empty bottles from that crystal clear waterfall over there. Oh well, here ya go!" (said in the voice of Butters from Southpark).
Re: (Score:2)
People who will die without it, obviously.
Because if they can't afford the medication, then they will die, and are no longer treatable with medication anyways.
While those who can afford it continue to live on, and so there is no incentive from the standpoint of the developers of the medication to lower the price.
Re: WTF (Score:2)
The patients aren't paying anything. Questcor was funneling money to a foundation that would make it "free" for the patients by covering the copays, and the rest would be billed towards Medicare. So we were paying for it.
And what about the Doctors who took bribes? (Score:1)
What about the thousands of Doctors who ignored their Hippocratic oath and accepted the bribes? Any mention of them, or are they irrelevant in the larger 'big company bad' political movement? Is their crime so politically useless as a message to not warrant mention or punishment?
More bribes given (Score:5, Insightful)
Let me guess how this happens (Score:5, Interesting)
I've experienced something similar in health care in Canada where two organizations providing the same service have a 100x difference in cost. In this case it's for safe injection sites Ottawa. The mayor is a promoting the city run site as a way of combating drug overdoses (Ottawa public health site on Clarence st.). They have a very sterile, easy to clean modern facility. A charity (shepherds of good hope) has a construction trailer. The Shepherds of Good hope actually care about addicts. They test drugs for impurities, will respond to overdoses in most places downtown and will accept "redirects" from the police and ambulances. The Shepherd's cost per injection is a little over $1 while the city's is $100. The reason - the city workers don't care at all about the budget, they are only running the site because the mayor wants them too. They definitely don't to care about the addicts and make their site as uninviting as possible. If there was anyone left at Ottawa public health who understood the costs were totally out of line they are keeping their heads down because fighting it just isn't worth it.
Is this related to FTC case against Mallinckrodt? (Score:5, Informative)
https://www.ftc.gov/news-event... [ftc.gov]
Mallinckrodt ARD Inc., formerly known as Questcor Pharmaceuticals, Inc., and its parent company, Mallinckrodt plc, have agreed to pay $100 million to settle Federal Trade Commission charges that they violated the antitrust laws when Questcor acquired the rights to a drug that threatened its monopoly in the U.S. market for adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH) drugs. Acthar is a specialty drug used as a treatment for infantile spasms, a rare seizure disorder afflicting infants, as well a drug of last resort used to treat other serious medical conditions.
The FTC’s complaint alleges that, while benefitting from an existing monopoly over the only U.S. ACTH drug, Acthar, Questcor illegally acquired the U.S. rights to develop a competing drug, Synacthen Depot. The acquisition stifled competition by preventing any other company from using the Synacthen assets to develop a synthetic ACTH drug, preserving Questcor’s monopoly and allowing it to maintain extremely high prices for Acthar.
“Questcor took advantage of its monopoly to repeatedly raise the price of Acthar, from $40 per vial in 2001 to more than $34,000 per vial today – an 85,000 percent increase,” said FTC Chairwoman Edith Ramirez. “We charge that, to maintain its monopoly pricing, it acquired the rights to its greatest competitive threat, a synthetic version of Acthar, to forestall future competition. This is precisely the kind of conduct the antitrust laws prohibit.”
Re:Is this related to FTC case against Mallinckrod (Score:4, Interesting)
and...
"In addition to the $100 million monetary payment, the proposed stipulated court order requires that Questcor grant a license to develop Synacthen Depot to treat infantile spasms and nephrotic syndrome to a licensee approved by the Commission.
A monitor will ensure that Questcor complies with its obligation to grant the license within 120 days of the entry of the order; after that time, a trustee will be appointed to effectuate the license. The order also requires Questcor to provide periodic reports on its efforts, and provide the Commission with advance notice of any future acquisitions of U.S. rights to ACTH drugs."
Re: (Score:2)
Is it just me or does every damned one of those names sound like an even cheesier rip-off of a kid's cartoon from the '80s?
Not un-believable (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
That would be colchicine, I would bet. A cheap generic, used for arthritis and gout pain for generations. Some company got an FDA exclusive to control the market for it in the US and it shot to Shkreli-like heights. Your government at work for you, screwing you blind.
Now that's INCENTIVE (Score:3)
Hell, that joke of a "fine" will actively encourage them to do that kind of shit with everything for as long they can!
Seizures (Score:1)
Land of the free, home of the brave (Score:1)
Isn't it funny how the libertarians who are seething with righteous indignation whenever something about "the left" is posted, are nowhere to be seen when shit like this comes up.
Re: (Score:1)
Pretty Good ROI (Score:2)
Would be nice to be rich (Score:3)
but I sure would not want their karma.
I'll make an exception in cases like this. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And worse, a fair number have been exonerated posthumously.
That's justice (Score:2)
American Corporate Justice
Message from the Trump justice dept: (Score:2)
Fuck you, and fuck justice.
Fines are (Score:2)
... just a cost of doing business.
The only way this stuff will stop is if you make it HURT. Percentage of profits for X number of years.
Re: (Score:2)
... just a cost of doing business.
The only way this stuff will stop is if you make it HURT. Percentage of profits for X number of years.
NO. Percentage of REVENUE. Otherwise you will get Creative Accounting worthy of Hollywood happening.
Get 8 Best Semi Automatic Washing Machines (Score:1)