Disadvantages Of Pharma Industry

Technological: Profitability is determined mainly by the ability to discover new drugs. Technology is at the forefront of the pharmaceutical industry because advances allow for expanded research and development which in turn allows for companies to create new powerful drug chemistries.

Pharmaceutical companies are provided with temporary monopoly rights on the production of new drugs which result in a higher cost on consumers. If competing companies were allowed to produce generic forms of those drugs, consumers will be able to afford those medications even in cases where those consumers have no insurance coverage. The company responsible for developing and inventing the original medication could be offered incentives to invent in the future by either obtaining tax breaks or NIH funding for future research. They could even be offered a percentage of the sales of the generic drugs. Economist Gary S. Becker advocates dropping many FDA requirements that, in his opinion, provide no additional safety measures but rather delay the development of new drugs.[12] Betamethasone, for example, has been part of the standard prenatal care in Europe since the late 1970’s while it got adopted in the U.S. after 1997. On many occasions, the FDA ignores all scientific evidence concerning certain drugs because the manufacturer did not follow their mandated bureaucratic standards.

I think Big Pharma companies skew their data very regularly. Although this is not ethical, it's practiced in this field because there is a certain probability calculated as it relates to side effects and ineffectiveness. For instance when we take Tylenol as a child we eventually become tolerant to the dosage. As we get older we need to increase the dosage even more than is advertised to get relief. The Pharma companies do not advertise that ALL pills have a toxicity level and will affect our organs at some point in time. Each pill is tested for toxicity levels before being released to the public. With that said, these companies take on a certain amount of acceptable risk when producing medication. The public has accepted this risk with

They have also attacked patent listings in the Food and Drug Administration “Orange Book” and have alleged monopolization through fraud on the Patent and Trademark Office and sham litigation. Yet other cases have condemned distribution agreements as unlawful exclusive dealing. These government actions have led to substantial private class action litigation against the pharmaceutical industry. The FTC has also challenged numerous mergers and acquisitions in the industry over the last decade. One common feature in all of these cases is the need to define a relevant market. In nonmerger cases, the FTC and private plaintiffsgenerally allege narrow markets, limited to a single drug and its generic equivalent in some cases and to generic drugs excluding the bioequivalent “brand-name” drug in other cases. In its merger challenges, on the other hand, the FTC has alleged markets ranging from those based upon a particular chemical compound, to broader markets based upon various drugs’ manner of interaction or dosage form, to still broader markets of all drugs used to treat a disease or condition. In numerous pharmaceutical merger challenges, the government has included in the market not only currently marketed drugs but also other drugs under development, alleging “innovation markets.”

2. Patent related and Generic Competition: The developed countries like US and Europe have strong patent protection laws which gives a lot of benefits for the pharmaceutical companies. But, the patent

U.S. based companies hold rights to most of the world’s rights on new medicines and holds thousands of new products currently being developed. As of 2012, the industry helps support almost 3.4 million jobs in the U.S. economy. It is also one of the most heavily R&D based industries in the world. In the United States, the environment for pharmaceuticals is much friendlier than other countries around the world in terms of pricing ability and regulations. Both the Pharmaceutical and Biotechnology industries have experienced significant growth in the past year with year-over-year increases of 13.02% and 34.69% respectively. It is an even more striking when looking at the past five years considering both have beat out the S&P 500 with pharmaceuticals increasing an additional 31.44% and the biotechnology sector besting an astonishing 269.3% more return than the

Technical risk, a large portion of all development costs are spent on drugs that never reach the market.

Even though the pharmaceutical industry had been highly profitable and contributed about 40% OF Ciba-Geigy’s revenues in profit, there were some trends, which were worrying. The government had attempted to reduce a cost of healthcare thus; pressure to lower costs was mounting on industrialized countries. There were restrictions to introduce new products, and price control became stricter while limiting the freedom of doctors to prescribe medications. Patent controls were becoming reduced, and the pharmaceutical industry was becoming increasingly criticized. These trends later made the industry to

-I think that it is necessary to relax some of the IPR rules. IPRS protect creativity and innovation for the investors making it harder for people to use inventor’s ideas without permission, I think that we should protect intellectual property rights of the pharmaceutical companies. To ensure that adequate announced supplies of AIDS medications would be available for distribution in the developing world, yes I believe IPR rules should be relaxed.

In 1970 the government passed two new regulations that has effect on the pharmaceutical industry. “The India Patent Act prohibited

While this case is literally full of negative aspects, we will only focus on the main points for both arguments. Pharmaceutical companies want to be sure that the products they spend years and millions of dollars to create are not easily reproduced and sold at discount prices. The profits pharmaceuticals make of their patented products are supposed to refinance new research. So taking away their exclusive distribution rights and allowing other manufacturers to just copy the product and sell it at

In order to decide on the R&D portfolio, an objective quantitative analysis might not be suitable considering the high levels of uncertainities and consequently the risks involved in pharmaceutical research projects. It is important to have a qualitative analysis of the situation as a whole that includes Vertex’s own financial position, strategic implications, a quantitative analysis of its Portfolios with realistic estimations and a risk analysis of the portfolios.

The concept of product patent for pharmaceutical products is likely to make life saving medicine beyond the reach of the poor and deprived section of the society around the world.

This enabled numerous “me too” drugs to achieve satisfactory returns on investment. Imitating a known drug reduced R&D risk considerably, while the marketplace was open to products offering minor advantages such as a more convenient dosage with fewer side effects, but with much the same therapeutic outcome. Generics legislation had a major impact on the industry, providing incentives for innovation and a race to market. The time during which R&D costs could be recouped was drastically curtailed, putting upward pressure on prices. By the end of the 1970s generic entrants and more stringent controls on clinical trials had led to substantial increases in R&D spending.

Although R&D has been retained by the large pharmaceutical firms, there has been a continuous decline in the R&D productivity. Controlling R&D is imperative to the success of a Pharmaceutical firm. However, as the pharmaceutical industry is maturing, there are diminishing returns to the R&D investment. Fewer and fewer blockbuster drugs are being discovered and therefore R&D is not the most value adding component in the value