The Pros And Cons Of Generic Drugs

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.”

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.

Recently, there had been a controversy over the rise in pharmaceutical costs involving the EpiPen in the United States. The EpiPen, also known as adrenaline/epinephrine, is a widely used injection that is used to treat allergic reactions. This generic drug has been available for many years. The EpiPen controversy is a prime example of how monopoly

Prescription drug prices are on the rise in the United States. Currently, the United States does not implement a price control on prescription drugs. Every day the supply and demand for prescription drugs fluctuates. Pharmaceutical companies produce drugs that are necessary for survival. Therefore, it is necessary for research and development to continue in the United States. Those suffering the effects of exorbitant prices must do so until a generic form of a prescription drug is produced. Once approved by the FDA, new drugs will make their appearance on the market and patients will no longer suffer financially. Until then, it is necessary for pharmaceutical companies to price their drugs based on the idea of supply and demand. This produces the profit used to fund research. Price controls discourage innovation. If a price control were set in place, of course the price of prescription drugs would decrease. However, the development of new drugs decreases with it. Today’s generation would benefit from lower prices, while future generations would suffer from the loss of drug innovation.

I. (Attention Getter) Opening with a question. How many of you believe brand name drugs are better than generic drugs?

In the pharmaceutical world, payers have switched to the generic brand over the brand-name drugs (The Commonwealth Fund, 2016). Although efforts to slow down the costs of healthcare might have work a little bit. A recent report shows spending has grew 5.7 percent in the past year (Altarum Institute, 2015).

The risk of generic substitution is also increasing with especially China dominating the production market. Customers will substitute for a generic product if the disposable incomes of the customers reduce resulting in customers willing to trade down for a inferior but cheaper product.

Between 2001 and 2011, the average patient’s out-of-pocket (OOP) cost for brand-name prescriptions rose by more than 80% (Tungol, et al., 2012, p. 691). The increasing OOP costs have contributed to a decrease

Prescription drug coverage is a challenge in the United States today. As this issue is addressed on the State and National level, challenges continue to be addressed. The topic of anti-epileptic drug treatment is one topic which has been presented to many states. The concern being brand name drugs versus generic drugs, the bioequivalence of anti-epileptic drugs and the cost. The passing of Generic drugs is beneficial to patients for savings, insurance benefits and coverage and the purpose of making drugs affordable for patients. The “Bioequivalence of most generics do not significantly deviate from brand name drugs, however multiple generic switches of individual drugs may vary as much as 30%.

The purpose of this paper is to address the state of prescription drugs within today’s society, as it relates to areas of development, approval, cost, and competition. There will be look at the benefits, such as continued research may lead to the development of new breakthrough prescription drugs. On the opposite end, there is an in-depth look at the controversies that surround the prescription drug industry. These include the many, often severe side effects that accompany many of these drugs, and how they are allowed to make it past FDA approval, as well as, a look at the rising cost of prescription drugs. Tied with the increasing cost, is a comparative look at the similarities and differences of brand name drugs versus their

Pharmaceuticals in the United States have been on the rise for years and everyone is trying to find was to get cheaper medication. New generics, 4 dollar lists, and coupons have been a growing force in pharmacies in the past few years. Some might think, “There has to be laws against rising prices, right?” Well, sort of.

What is the proper role of the following groups in addressing these dilemmas: National governments, Branded pharmaceutical firms, and Generic manufacturers?

The problematic issue for Bristol-Myers was to position its new aspirin drug to the potential customers and decide a good price which can not only make it acceptable by the customers, but also give a fair profit to the company. In other words, the company had to formulate an effective marketing and promotional strategy for its new drug, Datril. The company was not merely willing to establish its new brand in the analgesic market; the main issue was to establish this new brand in the presence of a strong competitor, Tylenol.

Moreover, generic drugs manufacturers sometimes start production of patent-protected drug analogues even before a patent expires. Although research-oriented companies in many cases are able to protect their patents, they do suffer from lost revenues.

Consumers do not always evaluate prices objectively. Often a referenced price is a known and available price, like that of a competitor. Pricing Datril at par with Tylenol and advertising it as a new substitute with same features may have been a fraught tactic in a short-run test environment. Market penetration and share take time and is unknown. Additionally, a price war could have ensued with Tylenol due to cost differences especially in advertising.