This week, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of consumers over drug companies by ruling that pay-to-delay tactics by pharmaceutical companies could violate antitrust laws. This could mean speedier access to low-cost generic drugs, greater prescription adherence among cash-strapped Americans, and lower healthcare payments for taxpayers.
In this landmark case, Federal Trade Commission vs. Actavis, the Court decided 5-3 that generic drug company Actavis may have violated federal anti-trust laws in accepting payment from a brand name drug company, Solvay Pharmaceuticals, to delay manufacturing a generic version of AndroGel. An important caveat of the decision is that patent settlements between drug companies are not unlawful by definition but that the law is flexible enough on a case by case basis to conclude that pay-to-delay is anti-competitive, and under some circumstances illegal.
The FTC has estimated that Americans spend an extra $3.5 billion each year because of pay-to-delay practices. If drug companies are deterred from attempting pay-to-delay agreements then more generics will be found on U.S. pharmacy shelves faster. FTC Chairwoman Edith Ramirez summed up the decision: “The Supreme Court’s decision is a significant victory for American consumers, American taxpayers and free markets.”
Americans interested in generic drug prices and pharmaceutical patent law have been closely following the U.S. Supreme Court as it hears arguments in a case over “pay-for-delay” – the practice of brand-name drug-makers seeking greater profits by paying off generic manufacturers to delay introduction of low-cost generic drugs. If “pay-for-delay” tactics are declared unconstitutional, then generics would reach pharmacy shelves faster, translating to lower prices for consumers, health insurers, and taxpayers.
The Court’s decision isn’t expected until June, but last Monday the Supreme Court of another country rendered another decision related to generics that may affect American prices. India’s Supreme Court ruled against the drug company Novartis’ patent claim on Gleevec, a cancer medication. Since India’s decision allows drug companies to continue manufacturing generic versions of Gleevec, called imatinib mesylate, prices will remain exceedingly low in India and low-income countries that import Indian pharmaceuticals.
So how much cheaper is generic Gleevec in Indian pharmacies than brand name Gleevec in American pharmacies? The New York Times reported that a one-year supply of brand name Gleevec in the U.S. is a staggering $70,000. The generic in India is only $2,500!
Additionally, even though Gleevec is under patent in other high-income countries like it is in the U.S., it is far less expensive internationally. At a local New York City pharmacy the price for 30 pills of Gleevec (400mg) is $6,980. The same brand name Gleevec (400 mg) from a Canadian pharmacy is just under $3,700. The same drug (but marketed by Novartis as Glivic), can be ordered online from Turkey for $2,979. That’s a potential savings of $4,000 a month! If you choose to buy Gleevec or any medication online, to protect your health, stick to verified online pharmacies, such as those approved by PharmacyChecker.com.
In the wake of the Indian Supreme Court’s decision, it would not be surprising if Novartis reacts by raising Gleevec prices here in America to bolster profits. Governments of other high-income countries probably won’t allow Novartis to raise prices on Gleevec, due to price controls. This is patently unfair to Americans, who should not have to pay so much more for the same medication than citizens of other high-income countries.
The personal drug importation saga continues in the State of Maine this this week as legislators consider a bill that would allow state residents to order prescription medication from foreign pharmacies. The bill follows in the wake of – and as a response to – Maine Attorney General William Schneider’s suspension of drug importation programs last September. Pressured by local pharmacies, Schneider argued that licensed foreign pharmacies could not sell to Maine residents because they were not licensed by Maine.
As the bill’s name makes clear, An Act to Ensure Consumer Choice in the Purchase of Prescription Drugs (LD 449) aims to preserve consumer choice and facilitate personal drug importation in order to bring down drug costs. This bill calls for legal personal importation from the following countries: Australia, Canada, Israel, Japan, New Zealand, Switzerland, South Africa, and any country in the European Union or European Economic Area.
According to a December poll conducted by the Press Herald, 92% of respondents felt that state residents should be allowed to purchase prescription drugs from Canada. LD 449 has support from Governor Paul LePage and the Maine State Employees Association. The City of Portland claims it saved $3.2 million through the importation program suspended by Attorney General Schneider.
The bill also has support from private employers. Scott Wellman, CFO of Hardwood Products Company, cited savings of $638,000 over the six years that the company’s employees imported medicine through CanaRx, a Canadian international mail-order pharmacy service.
The importation bill is noteworthy for declaring the existing legal impediments to importation an “emergency,” requiring that the legislation’s provisions take immediate effect. Maine’s legislators are taking a very progressive stance on personal drug importation, one that we’ll certainly continue to closely follow.
The pharmaceutical industry and FDA seem to want us to buy medicine at high prices. They say it’s dangerous to import cheaper medicine, even though it’s been shown to be safe when done through pharmacies approved by PharmacyChecker.com. In fact, recent events show that their supported high drug prices can cause major drug safety problems right here at home.
Forty-eight people in a nationwide Medicaid fraud syndicate were recently arrested for buying prescription drugs from Medicaid recipients and re-selling them. The medications included Zyprexa for Schizophrenia, Atripla and Trivizir for HIV/AIDS, and also asthma medications. As reported in the Wall Street Journal and CNN, the drugs made their way through a black market to a supply chain of “collectors” and “aggregators”, eventually working their way into wholesale companies and pharmacies in New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, Utah, Nevada, Louisiana, and Alabama. The medications were also sold in bodegas on the street.
Medicaid fraud is not new but the scope of this will cost taxpayers $500,000,000. The scariest thing about this fraud is that the drugs made it into licensed pharmacies throughout the United States. These drugs could have been adulterated, mishandled, or improperly stored – they may no longer be safe.
What lessons should we learn from this? Here are two to consider:
High drug prices helped create this black market, weakening the U.S. drug supply
As a result, American taxpayers bear the burden of higher healthcare costs.
High drug prices helped create this black market, weakening the U.S. drug supply
Medicaid patients sold their drugs because it was highly profitable, despite consequences to their own health. Pharmacies bought from black market wholesalers because their prices were cheaper. End-users bought medicine they needed from bodegas and street corners because it was cheaper than a trip to the pharmacy.
In countries with much lower drug prices there is less incentive for this type of fraud. We’ve made price comparisons among the types of prescription drugs fraudulently sold in the U.S. by looking at U.S. and international pharmacy prices.
Savings On Popular Medications Found in Fraud
Drug
US Bricks-and –Mortar price
Lowest International Price Found on PharmacyChecker.com
All prices collected on 7/19/2012. Bricks-and-Mortar pharmacy located in New York City
American taxpayers bear the burden of higher healthcare costs:
We paid taxes for Medicaid beneficiaries to not take their medicine as prescribed, and to instead sell their medicine. We paid the costs of hospitalization and emergency room visits for these people who went without needed medication and maybe even the end-users, who took potentially adulterated medicine.
It’s also likely that Medicaid was double-billed for the same exact pills: the first time when a Medicaid recipient received it; the second time when it was dispensed again from another pharmacy that received it from black market channels.
Despite problems with our distribution system, the U.S. has one of the world’s safest pharmaceutical supplies. However, the U.S. is not alone in having safe medication – not even close. The pharmaceutical industry and their supported groups fool consumers, elected officials and the media into believing that online pharmacies outside the United States are all dangerous, which, to be polite, is factually inaccurate. Let’s bring some balance to the issue and look at the drug supply problems in our own backyard. The problems here are serious, too, and fraud like this could even be prevented if there were easier access to safe and affordable medication.
As reported in DigitalJournal this past Wednesday, at a press conference in Keene, NH, Congressman Ron Paul (TX-14), Republican candidate for president, accused the pharmaceutical industry and the FDA of being in “bed together.” He derided their arrangement, characterized by a revolving door of people repeatedly switching jobs back and forth between the FDA and pharmaceutical industry, as collusion to reduce competition in the pharmaceutical marketplace, resulting in higher drug prices. When it comes to online pharmacies, personal drug importation and drug prices, Congressman Paul’s critique resonates all too loudly.
The pharmaceutical industry, through their main trade association Pharmaceutical Researchers and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA) has lobbied vigorously to keep safe personal drug importation illegal, and to scare Americans away through its media relations juggernaut and funding of the Partnership for Safe Medicine from buying safe and affordable medication online from Canada and other countries. PhRMA even commissioned the publication of a novel about a terrorist conspiracy – The Karasik Conspiracy – in which terrorists attack Americans with bad drugs sold from Canada! This effort backfired and they pulled the plug on the publishing company, which then went ahead and published a different version of The Karasik Conspiracy novel in which a pharmaceutical giant poisons medications to protect its profits. (more…)
Senator Byron Dorgan (D-SD), who is leaving congress at the end of this term, continues to stand up to the pharmaceutical industry and on behalf of American consumers, as he is once again trying to push forward legislation that legalizes drug importation in a manner that could make prescription medication more affordable. In December of 2009, Dorgan introduced an amendment to H.R. 3590: Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act to legalize drug importation, which received 51 yeas and 48 nays, falling short of the 60 votes needed for passage. Now Dorgan plans to introduce his legislation as an amendment to the food safety bill, which is sponsored by John Dingell (D-Mich). Dingell, however, is an adamant opponent to drug importation and is against attaching the amendment to his bill. Read the details in The Hill. (more…)
Welcome to PharmacyChecker Blog, brought to you by PharmacyChecker.com:
A source for news and analysis about drug prices and safety, online pharmacies and personal drug importation, published on behalf of American consumers.
