KD in CA Posted March 5, 2011 Posted March 5, 2011 If that would happen you can forget about any attempts to research and develop any new and innovative medications...what? then the academics could do it? Trust me, I've been doing R&D in the industry for more than 20 years, no way they could do it. We discard 100's if not 1000's of compounds before we advance 1, and that takes years. The hurdle is very high, you need new, unprecedented mechanisms, safety, great pharmacokinetics to advance a compound...maybe 10 years from synthesis to the clinic, then spend tens if not hundreds of millions to test it in humans...the days of "me too" medications were over years ago. Drug companies feel compelled to hit home runs now, not singles...shortening patent lives would lead to no new drugs...but yeah, everything would be cheap. Come on, get with the program. The government will create labs and crank out the new drugs without any of those evil profit-making corporations involved! Then we'll have free drugs for everyone.
Peace Posted March 5, 2011 Posted March 5, 2011 (edited) In the US, drug patents give twenty years of protection, but they are applied for way before any clinical trials begin, so the effective life of a drug patent tends to be between seven and twelve years. Are drug patents too short? Patents expire 20 years from their application filing date, which is usually 17 or so years from the date the application issues as a patent because it takes roughly 3 years from the day you apply for a patent to its grant. Pharma patents can get patent term extension for the time spent in FDA approval. It's a specific extension granted for pharma. Edited March 5, 2011 by Peace
birdog1960 Posted March 5, 2011 Posted March 5, 2011 (edited) .the days of "me too" medications were over years ago. really...how bout lily's livalo released late 2010-the poster child for me too's. there have also been more than a few racemic mixtures separated to result in a "more effective" (and patent prolonging) enantiomer in recent years. then somehow the "old" drug that billions were made on becomes woefully inadequate... Edited March 5, 2011 by birdog1960
Peace Posted March 5, 2011 Posted March 5, 2011 No. Given the crisis in the health and medical industry... The patents should be shorter... Anything to lower the price for the medical consumer. In "race to the bottom", no industry should be immune. The "crisis" in health has little to do with the drugs being invented to deal with them and a lot more to do with a lack of preventative medicine. Wow, that is jargonistic. LEt me try in plain English: Americans are a bunch of fat f***s and if they'd get off their couches and eat better, there would not be a health crisis. Everyone bitches about health care problems but if you go to the average ER, 90% of the people are a self-inflicted mess of overeating and drug abuse.
KD in CA Posted March 5, 2011 Posted March 5, 2011 The "crisis" in health has little to do with the drugs being invented to deal with them and a lot more to do with a lack of preventative medicine. Wow, that is jargonistic. LEt me try in plain English: Americans are a bunch of fat f***s and if they'd get off their couches and eat better, there would not be a health crisis. Everyone bitches about health care problems but if you go to the average ER, 90% of the people are a self-inflicted mess of overeating and drug abuse. +9872349872349872394823984239294865943286592183492138749 And don't forget....we need to have a pill for every conceivable, minor malady or inconvenience.
Doc Posted March 5, 2011 Posted March 5, 2011 not amazed at all, not even a little surprised....disappointed would be a better word. Why be disappointed? It's human nature. People (patients) want the latest and greatest and other people (doctors) want to give it to them, and if someone (insurance company) is willing to foot the bill, who are they to argue? If anything, you should be disappointed with patients who don't take care of themselves and need poly-pharmacy. Ultimately doctors are trying to treat patients the best way they can, and if that means they can't get people to take better care of themselves (which is usually the case), it's drugs, and the ones they think are best, but not necessarily cheapest. And people feed into that. Thankfully many drugs are coming off-patent. But will insurance rates decrease? And as for enantiomers (usually the L-form), they are safer and more potent. And eventually they come off-patent as well. If that would happen you can forget about any attempts to research and develop any new and innovative medications...what? then the academics could do it? Trust me, I've been doing R&D in the industry for more than 20 years, no way they could do it. We discard 100's if not 1000's of compounds before we advance 1, and that takes years. The hurdle is very high, you need new, unprecedented mechanisms, safety, great pharmacokinetics to advance a compound...maybe 10 years from synthesis to the clinic, then spend tens if not hundreds of millions to test it in humans...the days of "me too" medications were over years ago. Drug companies feel compelled to hit home runs now, not singles...shortening patent lives would lead to no new drugs...but yeah, everything would be cheap. :thumbsup The "crisis" in health has little to do with the drugs being invented to deal with them and a lot more to do with a lack of preventative medicine. Wow, that is jargonistic. LEt me try in plain English: Americans are a bunch of fat f***s and if they'd get off their couches and eat better, there would not be a health crisis. Everyone bitches about health care problems but if you go to the average ER, 90% of the people are a self-inflicted mess of overeating and drug abuse. +9872349872349872394823984239294865943286592183492138749 And don't forget....we need to have a pill for every conceivable, minor malady or inconvenience. Exactly. The problem is that people simply take worse and worse care of themselves as time goes on, figuring modern medicine will cure them of their lack of respect for their bodies, and thus they don't need to change their lifestyles. A large problem is that health plans are like buffets in that you can use health care dollars without regards to whether you need to or not. The example of the ER by "Peace" is a good one. Most of those visits are because people can go there without any repercussions, because it's not on their dime. What I find funny is Obama believing that by providing everyone with a PMD, ER utilization will decrease, as if you can see your PMD as easily as going to the ER.
birdog1960 Posted March 5, 2011 Posted March 5, 2011 (edited) Why be disappointed? It's human nature. People (patients) want the latest and greatest and other people (doctors) want to give it to them, and if someone (insurance company) is willing to foot the bill, who are they to argue? If anything, you should be disappointed with patients who don't take care of themselves and need poly-pharmacy. Ultimately doctors are trying to treat patients the best way they can, and if that means they can't get people to take better care of themselves (which is usually the case), it's drugs, and the ones they think are best, but not necessarily cheapest. And people feed into that. Thankfully many drugs are coming off-patent. But will insurance rates decrease? And as for enantiomers (usually the L-form), they are safer and more potent. And eventually they come off-patent as well just the type of thinking that propagates an unsustainable, failing system... and if isolated enantiomers are so superior (as you flippantly and generally proclaim) why not produce them at the outset? in most cases its a relatively simple stereochemical solution. Edited March 5, 2011 by birdog1960
Peace Posted March 5, 2011 Posted March 5, 2011 There is little difference between the average ER patient and Chernobyl survivor. And I'm hugely a fan of modern medicine BTW. I just wish it could focus on largely preventable diseases like say leukemia, instead of blowing tons of research money on heart disease which is usually avoidable if people would just live better. Obamacare's biggest failing to me, assuming I would have to live under its oppression, is that it doesn't force people to take care of themselves. How about this deal: You want the free government health care cheese? You have to workout 45 minutes a day 6 days a week at the government monitored gym. Piss off if you don't like it.
birdog1960 Posted March 5, 2011 Posted March 5, 2011 There is little difference between the average ER patient and Chernobyl survivor. And I'm hugely a fan of modern medicine BTW. I just wish it could focus on largely preventable diseases like say leukemia, instead of blowing tons of research money on heart disease which is usually avoidable if people would just live better. Obamacare's biggest failing to me, assuming I would have to live under its oppression, is that it doesn't force people to take care of themselves. How about this deal: You want the free government health care cheese? You have to workout 45 minutes a day 6 days a week at the government monitored gym. Piss off if you don't like it. sounds good to me.... except when the fat lazy jerks get communicable diseases that threaten my health...then we should treat them
Nanker Posted March 5, 2011 Posted March 5, 2011 If that would happen you can forget about any attempts to research and develop any new and innovative medications...what? then the academics could do it? Trust me, I've been doing R&D in the industry for more than 20 years, no way they could do it. We discard 100's if not 1000's of compounds before we advance 1, and that takes years. The hurdle is very high, you need new, unprecedented mechanisms, safety, great pharmacokinetics to advance a compound...maybe 10 years from synthesis to the clinic, then spend tens if not hundreds of millions to test it in humans...the days of "me too" medications were over years ago. Drug companies feel compelled to hit home runs now, not singles...shortening patent lives would lead to no new drugs...but yeah, everything would be cheap. My point exactly. Most people have no idea whatsoever what it takes to bring a new "blockbuster" to market.
Doc Posted March 5, 2011 Posted March 5, 2011 just the type of thinking that propagates an unsustainable, failing system... and if isolated enantiomers are so superior (as you flippantly and generally proclaim) why not produce them at the outset? in most cases its a relatively simple stereochemical solution. What's propagating an unsustainable and failing system is people taking worse and worse care of themselves, while giving them buffet-style health plans (including Medicare and Medicaid) which lead them to waste health care dollars at their whim. The system isn't failing because Big Pharma is creating new drugs; that's just a symptom of the much larger "disease."
birdog1960 Posted March 5, 2011 Posted March 5, 2011 What's propagating an unsustainable and failing system is people taking worse and worse care of themselves, while giving them buffet-style health plans (including Medicare and Medicaid) which lead them to waste health care dollars at their whim. The system isn't failing because Big Pharma is creating new drugs; that's just a symptom of the much larger "disease." i agree...but that doesn't jibe with your statement that "it's human nature" and thus we must abide it. people often don't know or do what's best for them. telling them and prescribing for them should be the job of experts armed with the best evidence available, not tv spokespersons, insurance and big pharma executives, and marketing gurus.
Doc Posted March 5, 2011 Posted March 5, 2011 i agree...but that doesn't jibe with your statement that "it's human nature" and thus we must abide it. people often don't know or do what's best for them. telling them and prescribing for them should be the job of experts armed with the best evidence available, not tv spokespersons, insurance and big pharma executives, and marketing gurus. If patients listened to their doctors, most of them wouldn't need medications. That is my point. Many patients don't listen. But it's interesting that Lipitor is the king for cholesterol-lowering drugs, while Crestor, which is newer (by 6 years) ranks 10 spots lower. Once Lipitor becomes generic, will prescriptions fall off?
Nervous Guy Posted March 5, 2011 Posted March 5, 2011 really...how bout lily's livalo released late 2010-the poster child for me too's. there have also been more than a few racemic mixtures separated to result in a "more effective" (and patent prolonging) enantiomer in recent years. then somehow the "old" drug that billions were made on becomes woefully inadequate... I'm specifically speaking about new projects that we work on...no more SSRI's, no mixed dopamine antagonists, etc...our given mandate is novel mechanisms,and trust me, it's tough business with unprecedented mechanisms, I can personally attest to the difficulty of doing this research. If the folks in formulation can improve the medication why not do it? That's not the me too's I was speaking about. Patents expire 20 years from their application filing date, which is usually 17 or so years from the date the application issues as a patent because it takes roughly 3 years from the day you apply for a patent to its grant. Pharma patents can get patent term extension for the time spent in FDA approval. It's a specific extension granted for pharma. and then the clinical trials take 4-5 more years....I don't know of many drugs that have been on the market for 17 years under patent protection. Maybe you can tell me a few.
ExiledInIllinois Posted March 6, 2011 Posted March 6, 2011 (edited) If that would happen you can forget about any attempts to research and develop any new and innovative medications...what? then the academics could do it? Trust me, I've been doing R&D in the industry for more than 20 years, no way they could do it. We discard 100's if not 1000's of compounds before we advance 1, and that takes years. The hurdle is very high, you need new, unprecedented mechanisms, safety, great pharmacokinetics to advance a compound...maybe 10 years from synthesis to the clinic, then spend tens if not hundreds of millions to test it in humans...the days of "me too" medications were over years ago. Drug companies feel compelled to hit home runs now, not singles...shortening patent lives would lead to no new drugs...but yeah, everything would be cheap. Like I said... I do see your side of the argument... I did say that... I know you work in the RX field. Yet... Believe me... If there is a void in the market... Somebody will fill it. If there is a will there is way. Necessity is the mother of invention. Just maybe there are too many new drugs. Let's see what happens. Come on, get with the program. The government will create labs and crank out the new drugs without any of those evil profit-making corporations involved! Then we'll have free drugs for everyone. That is just dumb. Maybe we actually need a slow down in what is being cranked out there... Maybe people actually need to die at some point. I know it is a hard thing to say. You guys are making the argument that if a league doesn't have a salary cap.. Only two teams will be playing. That is far from the truth. Again, when there is a will... There is way. If the market demands a product... Somebody will put it out there no matter what. The "crisis" in health has little to do with the drugs being invented to deal with them and a lot more to do with a lack of preventative medicine. Wow, that is jargonistic. LEt me try in plain English: Americans are a bunch of fat f***s and if they'd get off their couches and eat better, there would not be a health crisis. Everyone bitches about health care problems but if you go to the average ER, 90% of the people are a self-inflicted mess of overeating and drug abuse. :rolleyes: Edited March 6, 2011 by ExiledInIllinois
Jim in Anchorage Posted March 6, 2011 Posted March 6, 2011 Ah for the days when all illness could be cured with a opium elixir.
Nervous Guy Posted March 6, 2011 Posted March 6, 2011 Ah for the days when all illness could be cured with a opium elixir. indeed...now all we have is that friggin' spice crap.
ExiledInIllinois Posted March 6, 2011 Posted March 6, 2011 (edited) If patients listened to their doctors, most of them wouldn't need medications. That is my point. Many patients don't listen. But it's interesting that Lipitor is the king for cholesterol-lowering drugs, while Crestor, which is newer (by 6 years) ranks 10 spots lower. Once Lipitor becomes generic, will prescriptions fall off? Not everybody can be "kings"... They need something to kill the pain of everyday existence while at least having a "good time." I don't really disagree with you... But if the docs had their way... Everybody would look like they came from a concentration camp and live an extra 10 years of an already boring and poor existence. Again, playing devils advocate... I do respect people to go out early and with a little bang in their life. Everything in moderation... Not too much, not too little and not a burden on others. Enjoy life and stop worrying about it... Even if that shaves some years off your life. Ah for the days when all illness could be cured with a opium elixir. Who says those days are gone... That opium elixir is just a double cheese Whopper. Edited March 6, 2011 by ExiledInIllinois
Doc Posted March 6, 2011 Posted March 6, 2011 Not everybody can be "kings"... They need something to kill the pain of everyday existence while at least having a "good time." I don't really disagree with you... But if the docs had their way... Everybody would look like they came from a concentration camp and live an extra 10 years of an already boring and poor existence. Again, playing devils advocate... I do respect people to go out early and with a little bang in their life. Everything in moderation... Not too much, not too little and not a burden on others. Enjoy life and stop worrying about it... Even if that shaves some years off your life. Moderation is fine. That's not what's happening though.
ExiledInIllinois Posted March 6, 2011 Posted March 6, 2011 Moderation is fine. That's not what's happening though. Then the triple whammy: Burden to others. Another note... Somebody is surely making some dough off that excess... And when you see the excess by the people stop... Then you get all the whining and crying. The Vegas' of the world get upset at the Prez. So what gives? Damn if they do, damn if they don't. Quite a world we live in.
Recommended Posts