4: Meta & Material: 303
June 22, 2011 § Leave a comment
The “patent claptrap” was how I finished up last time. So said because I believe Big Pharma patent holders, patent perpetrators and patent monopoly priced pharmaceuticals buyers are trapped by their own appalling practices..
And yes, as I’ll explain in this and the next blog just as war has its mongers, Big Pharma today constitutes itself false arbiter ( in this blog) and mongrel of debt(following blog)
An insightful link with regard to the above is Matthew Herper. Around ten years ago he had a very sound reputation for coverage for investors in the US pharmaceutical industry @ Forbes magazine. In a widely read piece, 2002, he called for a 15 year rule ( giving effect to drug patent term price monopoly ) to enable drug companies return to a science-based R&D focus. Adding:—
A 15-year rule would remove uncertainty from both the generic and branded drug businesses and put the focus on science where it belongs
Optimistic to my way of thinking, yet heartfelt for all that. Ignored, what was to happen could be accurately described as the bungle of MBA managements.
Going on from the earlier point Matt also said: “Lately, there have been signs that the U.S. Federal Trade Commission** might crack down on the patent games drug giants play. Last week, Biovail acknowledged that it had been warned that some of the patents it filed on key drugs were illegal.” [ my highlight ]
A game which I’ll cover next time – it has not been mentioned here though it is evidenced in Australia and likely also in NZ(unless the PMA has nipped it in the bud, so to speak) is said to be non-patent whilst commercially at anyrate, related thereto. ‘Evergreening’. If you have time and a mind for it, Google EGA (European Generics (medicines) Assoc.) for a solid pithy 2006 take on this topic.
My third reason for citing MH is that the year 2002 was in one very important and highly relevant respect, a game-changer year. More especially in terms of Big Pharma’s roles vis a vis governments.
Recall if you will O’Neal’s report @ SundayStarTimes(stuff online):—
… activity comes as New Zealand presses for a bilateral free-trade agreement with the US and enters multilateral negotiations called the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) with Pacific Rim nations.
In a submission to those negotiations, US drug industry association PhRMA has cried foul over Pharmac’s stringent cost containment strategies and asked the US Trade Representative** to put New Zealand on a trade watchlist.
My double asterisk above marks the beginning(2002) and end (2010/11) in which the Big Pharma lobby has effected large self-favorable change. Not without reason, on the evidence, though such reason d’etre is entirely now misplaced.
To be utterly transparent on this, the G. W. Bush Administration were concerned that a Senator Kerry(Democrats) contention for the 2004 Presidential Election would seriously risk Bush’s loss. Taking over a democratic constituency like AARP (American Association of Retired Persons) was determined to avoid this. And permitting medicines subsidy to the tune of $400B (Part D to Medicare, 2003) the means of bringing them onside.
Yes, related parties – private health insurance etc – took back a good chunk of this money, but for Big Pharma circulation it was a goner. That said, henceforth the G.O.P. and republicans had secured both their latest majority-maker plus very significant support from Big Pharma.
And BTW, folks, a good lesson to learn from how serious political forces operate stateside is that to gain attention one contends targets. You want something you get access to take it. At that time Republicans ‘owned’ the show – Congress, Senate, White House, and a good heap of states. Set against this level of dominance we see how losers fall over themselves just getting back. Hence, in this case – (Politics, stupid!) – BAU was over. And this industry tasked itself to.. if it could not take over the government.. then undermining it was okay. Therein Industry’s executive elites embedded an aggrieved, or injured party, state of mind.
Against not its commercial competitors so much, but governments or bodies or entities anywhere who might impede, delay or thwart its market intentions. As your old friend HIM and my new friend would say: they don’t seek it yet they sure do deliver it—contention!
Revealed then a meta-full distortion that has no place playing out around the rest of the world. But will – as a driver to Big Pharma’s advantage – if pharmaceutical markets around the globe are unaware. And thus prejudiced, allow it.
To illustrate this Big Pharma sees the US Medicare as a “pressure on prices”. And New Zealand’s Pharmac as restricting prices as well as their prescription available drugs. Yet interestingly and ad rem lowered prices would answer both complaints satisfactorily.
In the absence of which aegrescit medondo* shall appear the only Big Pharma reality. In such a state of meta the oddness of one’s own position cannot be discerned. By participants. Neither accurately nor honestly.
The need of both HIM and I thusly appropriate.
Next time – blog-the-second upon the mongrel of debt…