I was very shocked to hear Bush II is in favor of a law forcing to limit the period of time infringement lawsuits by brand name manufacturers against generic makers to 30 months."To make generic, cheaper drugs avaiable sooner to Americans."I only know of a handful of litigation that's gone on or longer; Sandoz's Fiorinal, DuPont's Coumadin, Wyeth's Premarin, perhaps a few others. In the case of Fiorinal, I WAS rather peeved spending a fortune for a simple drug (ASA, caffeine, codeine phosphate, butalbital).Besides, the whole thing sounds like a crock. If anyone is really serious about lowering drug prices, how about start by giving the original developing companies a real 7 years to use their patent-protected time, starting when the first dose rolls out of production for clinical use?? Which everybody knows isn't the way it works. Reduce time to gain ROI and profit after ROI, price goes up. No brainer. Is this guy really a Republican?I wonder what would happen to brand name drug prices if a longer, guaranteed exclusive patent were granted? Bet they'd drop...And what would a legitimate infringement suit consist of, what grounds? Apart from using improperly obtained trade secrets, or patent infringement outright, (i.e., prior to the expiry of the original manufacturer's legal patents)?RSH.
RSH - I wasn't shocked since it is so close to senate / house elections and the republicans are deeply wanting to gain voting majority, or get closer to...Politicos will do anything to gain votes - you know that...
RSH - I wasn't shocked since it is so close to senate / house elections and the republicans are deeply wanting to gain voting majority, or get closer to...Politicos will do anything to gain votes - you know that... J, it's just such garbage, when there are other, reasonable sorts of legislation that could help people floating somewhere.If there were such a thing as a placebo bill, this would be one of them. Anybody who doesn't file for infringement within 30 months deserves to lose. There was nothing about concluding those procedings.This does nothing to help either consumers or the industry.And most of my issues with generics are with bioavailability, packaging, and excipients / formulation, which is supposed to be in the FDA's purview.A patient friend of mine will NOT take anything but brand-name Valium (diazepam, Roche), even though it costs a ton more than the generic. The generic tabs dissolve too quicly, before she can swallow them.Another, who's been on methylphenidate for years, taking the generic, ended up with the Ciba brand name once because the pharmacy was out of the generic; the pharmacist (you have to love these crusty old pharmacists with 102 years of experience) warned him not to take as much of the brand name product, as he'd had patients with problems switching from one to the other.And thanks to the generic / brand name confusion, I've seen tablets and capsules for the same meds change colors and sizes; God forbid the Pharmacist forgets the "Although the appearance of the medication dispensed to you may appear different, it is the same medicine, in the same dosage, as you have been taking."I myself once received Nitroglyn (sublingual nitroglycerin tablets) rather than Lomotil (more aggravatingly, the Nitroglyn was dispensed improperly [must be in a sealed special bottle]), and other messes over the years; how many patients do not notice?Which all has even less to do with this Bush bill, which so far as I can tell is one of the least meaningful pieces of legislation I've ever heard of.Why doesn't he just dedicate a Post Office or airport or something?RSH.
Best Of |
Favorites & Replies |
Start a New Board |
My Fool |