Pharma companies disown Shkreli; Pissed, Shkreli airs their dirty laundry
95 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Radical_ed;51723915]Shkreli is a perfect example of a scapegoat that absolutely everyone fell for. He's a big, giant, obvious distraction.
Here are the facts;
- What he did will MARGINALLY increase the cost of healthcare for everyone
- He has claimed uninsured peoples will be offered the medicine free of charge
- He was targeted specifically because the media knew he was hateable; many companies, whether good or bad, do this, but all the others hide it instead of flaunting it around
[b]- He has claimed that the increased revenue, drawn from insurance companies, will go towards making a better medicine[/b]
Anyone who's hellbent on saying he is the devil is easily goaded.[/QUOTE]
Except aren't insurance companies fully capable of saying "Yeah no, sorry, not paying for that shit"? How does one draw revenue when A ) Nobody is paying for it, and B ) You're giving it away for free?
[QUOTE=Zero-Point;51724021]Except aren't insurance companies fully capable of saying "Yeah no, sorry, not paying for that shit"? How does one draw revenue when A ) Nobody is paying for it, and B ) You're giving it away for free?[/QUOTE]
He's claimed multiple times that he wasn't making money off of that price hike. Watch the video joost posted. I didn't know what to think of the back-and-forth posts about Shkreli, really, until I saw that a couple months ago.
[QUOTE=joost1120;51723999]From what I understand the investors got their share, which was quite a lot. What was left would go to research.
Either way, even if no money would go to research, they would still be better than most pharmaceutical companies. Most companies overcharge their drugs and they don't even bother researching new drugs.
At least Turing Pharmaceuticals got some attention to Daraprim.[/QUOTE]
The last company who held Daraprim overcharged, but they didn't overcharge [I]that[/I] much. Turing Pharmaceuticals is just another company, Shkreli isn't any better than any other CEO of a company that hikes the prices of their drugs without adding value to it. By your logic Mylan is "at least getting Epinephrine some attention". Daraprim getting "attention" is worth shit when Turing pharmaceuticals practices are what is preventing the drug from being affordable - the way they're selling it means that no one can market an FDA approved generic, and I think something people are forgetting when we talk price is that the price was raised to $750 [I]per pill[/I]. The price for a single pill in Australia is (according to Wikipedia) $0.18, which makes the price increase even more dramatic - the "original" list price of $13.50 per pill was already insane.
You don't realize this man is doing gods work:
- Being a giant douche, he attracts media attention
- Being in spotlight of all this shit that he is doing brings even more attention
- Media attacking him because 'people will die cause of him'
- People hating on him
- Pharma companies disowning him because 'he is bad guy'
- He is now exposing every Pharma company that is doing same thing he is doing, yet worse
But you people yell 'Shkreli scum' yet you don't realize dark side of whole pharma industry which is even worse than this guy you are hating on.
[QUOTE=Fourier;51724075]You don't realize this man is doing gods work:
- Being a giant douche, he attracts media attention
- Being in spotlight of all this shit that he is doing brings even more attention
- Media attacking him because 'people will die cause of him'
- People hating on him
- Pharma companies disowning him because 'he is bad guy'
- He is now exposing every Pharma company that is doing same thing he is doing, yet worse
But you people yell 'Shkreli scum' yet you don't realize dark side of whole pharma industry which is even worse than this guy you are hating on.[/QUOTE]
If you want to invest attention to someone trying to reform US pharmaceutical industry, I recommend Sanders over Shkreli by far.
[editline]25th January 2017[/editline]
[QUOTE=Sam Za Nemesis;51724079]Because research of new drugs is super expensive, if they don't make a profit they won't make new drugs to save people and will instead close down, and being publicly funded would make it even more prohibitively expensive?[/QUOTE]
You're mixing profit with reinvestment. Massive profit margins aren't necessary to research, they may be detrimental if profits are prioritized over research. Beyond that, Usually pharmaceutical companies use more on marketing than research anyway, and among industries they have relatively little R&D to marketing.
[url]http://www.randalolson.com/2015/03/01/design-critique-putting-big-pharma-spending-in-perspective/[/url]
Marketing includes bribing doctors so they prescribe specific drug more :)
[QUOTE=Fourier;51724109]Marketing includes bribing doctors so they prescribe specific drug more :)[/QUOTE]
Yea, and if you watched the video you'll see Shkreli's glib take on that practice. Further reason to not support the man.
[QUOTE=Vlevs;51724085]If you want to invest attention to someone trying to reform US pharmaceutical industry, I recommend Sanders over Shkreli by far. [/QUOTE]
Not saying Sander is worse than Shkreli.
[QUOTE=Fourier;51724075]You don't realize this man is doing gods work:
- Being a giant douche, he attracts media attention
- Being in spotlight of all this shit that he is doing brings even more attention
- Media attacking him because 'people will die cause of him'
- People hating on him
- Pharma companies disowning him because 'he is bad guy'
- He is now exposing every Pharma company that is doing same thing he is doing, yet worse
But you people yell 'Shkreli scum' yet you don't realize dark side of whole pharma industry which is even worse than this guy you are hating on.[/QUOTE]
Drug pricing in general is a huge problem, and something I'd like Danish politicians to take on both nationally and in the EU. Shkreli and Turing is just yet another company taking advantage of the legal situation, they aren't worse, they've simply called attention to themselves by doing such a dramatic price hike immediately instead of gradually.
Question is why Shkreli did the same thing with Thiola (raised the price from $1.5 to $30) during his time at Retrophin, if all he wanted was to raise awareness. Shkreli has been in the drug business for a while, so this sudden motivation of simply exposing the industry seems like a retrofit to me.
Other companies (Mylan, or the other epipen-like product I posted an article about a few days ago) are doing the same thing, but Shkreli is the only one to have somehow convinced users on here that he's fighting the good fight. I won't dispute that he has raised awareness, question is whether that was the intended point or simply a side effect.
In Denmark the issue lies more with new cancer drugs and the issue is really of a different nature from the US. But I'm not ignorant of the fact that Turing isn't alone, thank you very much.
It may be just side-effect, but he doesn't seem stupid so I think he is doing it intentionally. I mean, he could do it gradually and still profit massively off it.
[QUOTE=Fourier;51724143]It may be just side-effect, but he doesn't seem stupid so I think he is doing it intentionally. I mean, he could do it gradually and still profit massively off it.[/QUOTE]
Maybe I'm mistaken, but right after the price increase, Shkreli didn't start talking about how bad the pharmaceutical industry was, he talked about how $1000 really isn't a lot to save your life and how he could've raised the price even higher, and that really the only ones to pay would be the insurance companies etc. (something they talked about internally in the company even before the backlash, according to [url=http://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2016/02/02/465284148/-another-7-2-million-pow-a-peek-inside-turing-pharmaceuticals]this[/url] article). Then how the money would be used for R&D, and then it morphed into the "just exposing the industry" narrative we have today.
Shkreli is probably not entirely stupid, and maybe he just played all of us as a fiddle, or maybe his company tried to raise the price of a drug to insane levels, they faced backlash, and now Shkreli is trying to make himself look good and get attention (something he obviously craves with all his shenanigans).
Here's the thing about all this, though. It's all well and good that he does all these alleged amazing things with the money he made off running a pharma company, but [I]nobody will ever believe you[/I] and [I]you're going to get fired[/I] if you're an asshole about it. Bill Gates is filthy fucking rich off of dubious business practices and does good things with that money and nobody really gives him shit for it because he can [I]manage to not be ~le epik trole~ for five minutes whenever he's in the spotlight.[/I]
Shkreli is the epitome of the scum of my and the upcoming generation: no fucking social responsibility or civility. He thinks it's his right to be a complete cunt and the moment he catches shit for it, he throws a temper tantrum because he didn't get his way.
[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;51724071]The last company who held Daraprim overcharged, but they didn't overcharge [I]that[/I] much. Turing Pharmaceuticals is just another company, Shkreli isn't any better than any other CEO of a company that hikes the prices of their drugs without adding value to it. By your logic Mylan is "at least getting Epinephrine some attention". Daraprim getting "attention" is worth shit when Turing pharmaceuticals practices are what is preventing the drug from being affordable - the way they're selling it means that no one can market an FDA approved generic, and I think something people are forgetting when we talk price is that the price was raised to $750 [I]per pill[/I]. The price for a single pill in Australia is (according to Wikipedia) $0.18, which makes the price increase even more dramatic - the "original" list price of $13.50 per pill was already insane.[/QUOTE]
Right, but Daraprim is a terrible drug. It kills Toxoplasma just as fast as it kills you and it has terrible side effects.
There doesn't need to be a new Epipen, as it works just fine the way it is. The price was increased just for additional profit. Daraprim's price increase, on the other hand, was to increase funding for research.
This increase in price hasn't stopped anyone from getting Daraprim. The patient doesn't notice the price, because insurance companies pay it. In events where they don't, they can get high discounts or even free Daraprim.
Epipen had a similar price hike, but they don't pour the money into research. That money goes to their bank accounts instead. In the UK, you can buy a pair of 2 epipens for £8.5. A single epipen in the US will cost you $600.
[QUOTE=Fourier;51724143]It may be just side-effect, but he doesn't seem stupid so I think he is doing it intentionally. I mean, he could do it gradually and still profit massively off it.[/QUOTE]
getting caught was a part of his plan
no really i highly doubt this is shreklis master plan, there are a million better ways he could've gone about what you think is his goal. he's just easy to sympathise with because now he's apparently the overdemonised underdog even though things just obviously got out of hand for him more than he anticipated.
the guy is literally a fraudster, he has frauded his own investors and yet we're inclined to believe him because he's suddenly a scapegoat. this is the flipside of his publicity in the matter, when we see someone get this buttdevastated by his business partners and public courts you just have to start sympathising on some level.
[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;51724139]Drug pricing in general is a huge problem, and something I'd like Danish politicians to take on both nationally and in the EU. Shkreli and Turing is just yet another company taking advantage of the legal situation, they aren't worse, they've simply called attention to themselves by doing such a dramatic price hike immediately instead of gradually.
Question is why Shkreli did the same thing with Thiola (raised the price from $1.5 to $30) during his time at Retrophin, if all he wanted was to raise awareness. Shkreli has been in the drug business for a while, so this sudden motivation of simply exposing the industry seems like a retrofit to me.
Other companies (Mylan, or the other epipen-like product I posted an article about a few days ago) are doing the same thing, but Shkreli is the only one to have somehow convinced users on here that he's fighting the good fight. I won't dispute that he has raised awareness, question is whether that was the intended point or simply a side effect.
In Denmark the issue lies more with new cancer drugs and the issue is really of a different nature from the US. But I'm not ignorant of the fact that Turing isn't alone, thank you very much.[/QUOTE]
Saw this thing about Mylan, shitty thing. It sems like Shkreli did exposed Pharma but it seems like Pharma saw that nothing big happened to Shkreli (until now) and stopped giving a fuck.
[editline]25th January 2017[/editline]
[QUOTE=Falchion;51724234]getting caught was a part of his plan
no really i highly doubt this is shreklis master plan, there are a million better ways he could've gone about what you think is his goal. he's just easy to sympathise with because now he's apparently the overdemonised underdog even though things just obviously got out of hand for him more than he anticipated.
the guy is literally a fraudster, he has frauded his own investors and yet we're inclined to believe him because he's suddenly a scapegoat. this is the flipside of his publicity in the matter, when we see someone get this buttdevastated by his business partners and public courts you just have to start symphatising on some level.[/QUOTE]
True, this thing about investor fraud is scummy as hell.
[QUOTE=Falchion;51724234]getting caught was a part of his plan
no really i highly doubt this is shreklis master plan, there are a million better ways he could've gone about what you think is his goal. he's just easy to sympathise with because now he's apparently the overdemonised underdog even though things just obviously got out of hand for him more than he anticipated.
the guy is literally a fraudster, he has frauded his own investors and yet we're inclined to believe him because he's suddenly a scapegoat. this is the flipside of his publicity in the matter, when we see someone get this buttdevastated by his business partners and public courts you just have to start sympathising on some level.[/QUOTE]
Guilty until proven innocent, right?
[QUOTE=joost1120;51724320]Guilty until proven innocent, right?[/QUOTE]
You don't get to enjoy the benefit of the doubt in the public eye when all you do in public is act like a complete impunitive shitstain
[QUOTE=joost1120;51724223]Right, but Daraprim is a terrible drug. It kills Toxoplasma just as fast as it kills you and it has terrible side effects.
There doesn't need to be a new Epipen, as it works just fine the way it is. The price was increased just for additional profit. Daraprim's price increase, on the other hand, was to increase funding for research.
This increase in price hasn't stopped anyone from getting Daraprim. The patient doesn't notice the price, because insurance companies pay it. In events where they don't, they can get high discounts or even free Daraprim.
Epipen had a similar price hike, but they don't pour the money into research. That money goes to their bank accounts instead. In the UK, you can buy a pair of 2 epipens for £8.5. A single epipen in the US will cost you $600.[/QUOTE]
Let me just quote what I linked to in my post:
[QUOTE]"HIV patient advocacy may react to price increase ... we still come out ahead if we can frame this issue within the HIV/AIDS community as a fight between a drug company and insurance companies. As long as everyone who needs Daraprim can get it as soon as they need it, regardless of ability to pay, the community should have no issue. There is no love lost between HIV/AIDS activists and insurance companies, and they certainly don't want to be manipulated by them to fight on their behalf."[/QUOTE]
Now let me ask, if every pharmaceutical company raised it prices, but had similar schemes (the new $4500 epipen alternative I posted yesterday has basically the same proposition as Daraprim), who's going to shoulder the cost? The insurance companies... who make money by selling insurance to people (who are both the end users and the real financiers)? The "Insurance companies will pay for it, not patients"-schtick is bunch of bullshit, because insurance companies aren't harvesting money on the moon to pay for prescriptions, they have healthy customers who are a net positive and sick customers who are a net negatives (some of the time at least). The customers are still footing the bill.
Actually, let me just link to the congressional memo: [url]https://democrats-oversight.house.gov/sites/democrats.oversight.house.gov/files/documents/Memo%20on%20Turing%20Documents.pdf[/url]
Basically you're doing exactly what this consultant wished you would do:
[QUOTE]The same consultant continued: “What I’d be looking for is something along the lines of
Turing lowers the price by xx% and announces a package of assistance programs for
patients that guarantees no patient will be denied access nor will they pay anymore. …
This will force reporters to focus on the byzantine nature of drug pricing and health care
and ensure the patient message gets out. … [B]specifically tie profits from Daraprim to the
research and development of a new and more effective treatment for Daraprim patients.
… This can set you up also for more long term reputation rehabilitation by forcing a
focus on Turing as a research and development company—not a pharma hedge fund
hybrid.[/B]” The board member forwarded the email to Nancy Retzlaff, Chief Commercial
Officer, and Ed Painter, the Head of Investor Relations at Turing, the same day.3[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]An October 27, 2015, presentation described communications strategies utilized by other
drug companies. Slides titled “Public Position on Pricing” stated:
o “Horizon (Vimovo) distinguishes patient OOP [out-of-pocket] costs from WAC
[Wholesale Acquisition Cost], and highlights their patient assistance program.”
o “Teva (Copaxone) speaks about patient benefit and asserts that pricing is ‘fair and
reflective of the rising costs of R&D.’”
o “When challenged on pricing, Gilead (Sovaldi) affirms treatment is fairly priced
and highlights tiered pricing approach for countries in need.”
o “Valeant (Nitropress/Isuprel) responds to pricing scrutiny by downplaying the
true impact of cost.”
o “Mallinckrodt (Ofirmev) touts clinical benefits and cost-saving in comparison to
alternative treatment options.”
The last page of the presentation recommended: “[B]Focus pricing on unmet medical need
and value of the drug; revenue fuels R&D.[/B]”38[/QUOTE]
Shkreli may have personally had a bunch of altruistic visions for Turing or whatever (I can't really prove that he didn't, though this quote doesn't show him in such a nice light:
[QUOTE]An undated presentation highlighted Mr. Shkreli’s experience with other prescription
drug price increases, including Daraprim, Chenodal, and Thiola. The presentation stated:
“increased Chenodal price 5x with no pushback from payors ... Licensing of Thiola …
Increased price 21x with no pushback from payors … Acquisition of Daraprim …
Increased price 43x with no pushback from payors.”9[/QUOTE]
)
But it's pretty clear that to the company this was at least in large parts simply PR strategies.
I won't and can't really give a qualitative appraisal of Daraprim as a drug - maybe it's awful, I couldn't tell you, but is it so awful that the price/benefit proposition of Turing makes sense? "Pay us thousands of dollars for treatment that could cost $30 for years (with a healthy amount of profit), and then pay thousands of dollars for a new better treatment"?
[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;51724328]Let me just quote what I linked to in my post:
Now let me ask, if every pharmaceutical company raised it prices, but had similar schemes (the new $4500 epipen alternative I posted yesterday has basically the same proposition as Daraprim), who's going to shoulder the cost? The insurance companies... who make money by selling insurance to people (who are both the end users and the real financiers)? The "Insurance companies will pay for it, not patients"-schtick is bunch of bullshit, because insurance companies aren't harvesting money on the moon to pay for prescriptions, they have healthy customers who are a net positive and sick customers who are a net negatives (some of the time at least). The customers are still footing the bill.
Actually, let me just link to the congressional memo: [url]https://democrats-oversight.house.gov/sites/democrats.oversight.house.gov/files/documents/Memo%20on%20Turing%20Documents.pdf[/url]
Basically you're doing exactly what this consultant wished you would do:
Shkreli may have personally had a bunch of altruistic visions for Turing or whatever (I can't really prove that he didn't, though this quote doesn't show him in such a nice light:
)
But it's pretty clear that to the company this was at least in large parts simply PR strategies.
I won't and can't really give a qualitative appraisal of Daraprim as a drug - maybe it's awful, I couldn't tell you, but is it so awful that the price/benefit proposition of Turing makes sense? "Pay us thousands of dollars for treatment that could cost $30 for years (with a healthy amount of profit), and then pay thousands of dollars for a new better treatment"?[/QUOTE]
It's true that it fucks over insurance companies, but there's other drugs that are way more expensive. The price hike just sets it more in line with those drugs. The patients don't notice it, and maybe within 5 years they get a replacement drug that doesn't cause seizures, tremors, neurological dysfunction, thrombocytopenia and toxic hepatitis.
History has proven that investors don't want to pay for research, otherwise there would already be an alternative. The money has to come from somewhere.
[QUOTE=Robman8908;51724061]He's claimed multiple times that he wasn't making money off of that price hike. Watch the video joost posted. I didn't know what to think of the back-and-forth posts about Shkreli, really, until I saw that a couple months ago.[/QUOTE]
So I ask again: What's the point of raising the price for R&D if you're not making any money off of it?
[QUOTE=joost1120;51724371]It's true that it fucks over insurance companies, but there's other drugs that are way more expensive. The price hike just sets it more in line with those drugs. The patients don't notice it, and maybe within 5 years they get a replacement drug that doesn't cause seizures, tremors, neurological dysfunction, thrombocytopenia and toxic hepatitis.
History has proven that investors don't want to pay for research, otherwise there would already be an alternative. The money has to come from somewhere.[/QUOTE]
It fucks over [I]everyone[/I] because insurance companies don't fund themselves. High drug costs leads to higher cost for the end user whichever way you wanna put it. Daraprim's pricing being put "more in line with other drug costs" also puts Turing and Shkreli more in line with other drug companies and CEOs, so why are you using that as a defence?
How normal are those side effects? All drugs have side effects, and some are very serious - but they may also be very rare. Do you have any qualifications that allows you to say Daraprim is an [I]especially[/I] bad product in need of a replacement? Or do you have a source (not Shkreli himself, please) to back that up?
And investors are still paying for research if they're using the daraprim money to fund it.
[editline]25th January 2017[/editline]
[QUOTE=Zero-Point;51724434]So I ask again: What's the point of raising the price for R&D if you're not making any money off of it?[/QUOTE]
According to themselves, the former owner of Daraprim made less than $10m a year, but with the price increase they expected it to earn themselves $200m in revenue, and $134m in profits for the year of 2016. I have a very hard time believing they aren't making a profit on the product, considering the cost of Daraprim in other countries (meaning production costs are minimal).
[QUOTE=AaronM202;51723558]I dont know, guys a dickhead but calling him the "scum of the earth" sounds like uninformed hyperbole.[/QUOTE]
I'd say it's pretty apt considering we're talking about an incredibly rich corporate shark who has proven time and time again he has no empathy or care for the welfare of others.
[QUOTE=Zero-Point;51724434]So I ask again: What's the point of raising the price for R&D if you're not making any money off of it?[/QUOTE]
And I say again, watch that video. He claims that it forces companies in comfortable spots to have to look toward R&D for a better drug. Daraprim is old as fuck, but nothing has been improved upon because money had been made on it for so long.
If it makes money years later, why spend sweet sweet profits to make something better? That's why (he claims) he rose the price.
[QUOTE=Robman8908;51724830]And I say again, watch that video. He claims that it forces companies in comfortable spots to have to look toward R&D for a better drug. Daraprim is old as fuck, but nothing has been improved upon because money had been made on it for so long.
If it makes money years later, why spend sweet sweet profits to make something better? That's why (he claims) he rose the price.[/QUOTE]
So it wasn't so that [I]he[/I] could use the funds to research a better drug, but to try and force the other pharmaceutical companies to get off their ass and research a better drug instead of him?
Sounds like a foolish gamble if you ask me, especially if, as you said, it's been making money reliably for so long. Why not just use THAT money to R&D a replacement?
[QUOTE=srobins;51723541]Have you ever considered people disagree with you for reasons other than being "edgy"[/QUOTE]
True, but have you considered there's no plausible way to make this guy NOT look like a huge cunt
Did everyone forget about the topic of the thread?
[QUOTE=DOCTOR LIGHT;51724720]I'd say it's pretty apt considering we're talking about an incredibly rich corporate shark who has proven time and time again he has no empathy or care for the welfare of others.[/QUOTE]
I dont know, maybe yes maybe no?
The whole thing confuses the shit out of me and theres evidence both for and against what he's said, i cant get a solid opinion on the matter.
martin shkreli's a piece of shit, but he's become the poster boy of "corruption" by doing exactly what everyone else in the industry has been doing. his existence is a reminder that our private healthcare system is completely fucked to the core. between insurance and pharmaceutical titans waging their cash war against each other, you have people clinging onto their legs hoping that they don't fall off and get utterly crushed.
[QUOTE=Zero-Point;51724021]Except aren't insurance companies fully capable of saying "Yeah no, sorry, not paying for that shit"? How does one draw revenue when A ) Nobody is paying for it, and B ) You're giving it away for free?[/QUOTE]
Counterpoint; why would he purchase it at all if nobody was going to pay for it
[editline]25th January 2017[/editline]
also, when I was listing the facts of the matter, I said what he CLAIMED he would do. Whether he will ACTUALLY do it or not is another matter, but only time will tell with that one, and so far there's no evidence that he will or will not do it.
Apparently hospitals still have to pay for the overpriced drug. So are individual patients really supposed to contact the company in order to get the daraprim they need? Is it really expected that they're aware of all this drama caused by some rich guy and the intention that you can get it for free? Who do you even contact if you need it? Is there a phone number you can call and ask for the free drug? Have there been accounts of anyone actually getting this drug for free?
I tried looking it up but I can't find any positives out of this situation. The price has been hiked up but that's somehow a good thing? Could someone explain?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.