Pharma companies disown Shkreli; Shkreli airs their dirty laundry

This week, a pharmaceutical trade group stepped up its efforts to distance itself from Martin Shkreli, the disgraced ex-CEO of several drug companies who gained notoriety for an eye-popping drug price increase and an indictment for securities fraud. The trade group even made a television ad to try to bolster its image and make clear that it is different—better—than the likes of Shkreli and his greedy ways.

Is it, though? If you ask Shkreli, it's not. And he’s made a website to try to convince you.

On the bare-bones Pharmaskeletons.com, an angry and vengeful Shkreli lists instances of greed, criminal behavior, and other sleaziness of individual members of the pharmaceutical trade group PhRMA. Not all his claims are backed up, explained, or accurate. But the site still offers an embarrassing catalogue of bad deeds, which Shkreli told STAT he would continually update.

Source Link

Link to Pharma Skeletons

I am not surprised by this one. Basically pot and kettle.

Hopefully the Feds will start looking into some of the pricing issues that are happening. I imagine there are many who think fair price/fair profit and many who think get as much profit as can be had.

My belief is in the log run, nothing really changes.

a reply to: roadgravel

Not all the claims are backed up?

Thread title should read "airs his own dirty laundry, as well as others."

Glad he's willing to open the door on some of this stuff but there's absolutely zero nobility behind him doing it, and he had no problem profiting off the same stuff he's accusing others of doing.

That's not even getting into all the stuff he can't back up.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: roadgravel

Not all the claims are backed up?

He lists quite a few links but the author didn't provide more information. I would imagine it would take a lot of work. He probably got a bit loose but no doubt some of it has a basis. (Remember the epi pen)

He did mention he learned the pricing game from another pharm exec.

It was odd how this one guy got singled out. He gives the drug he bought and price hiked for free to those who cannot afford, mainly ripping off insurance companies.
He must of pissed off some other people in pharm industry and media. Or didn't pay off the right people.

Not a saint, but not this devil caricature.

This is the pot of gold if anyone is serious about solving healthcare cost in US. This is my litmus test for Trump's America First. Why are we subsidizing the cost of drugs across the globe. The profit/margin component is really spread across us population. Time for the rest of the world to pony up cost. Also I vote for no more drug ads on tv. Since they allowed drug companies to air drugs on tv the line of utilization is lock step and barrel with ads.

a reply to: roadgravel

It is also interesting that the Obamacare replacement will focus on lowering costs, esp pharmaceuticals. Timing is appropriate.

a reply to: Ash614
Sometimes I think the ads are to make people more open to drugs that may not be a solution.

Interesting the see commercials for a drug then a couple of years later the lawyer ads for the drug appear.

Oh look, Shkreli wants attention. That's all this is.

I am not a fan of shkreli.

That aside, he has been dropping redpills here and about lately.

His first redpill dropped when we discovered his name.

I have little reason to doubt the brutally honest.

I'm still waiting for him to release the unreleased Beatles, Big L, and Michael Jackson songs he said he would if Trump won.

a reply to: Xcalibur254

And the big Pharma industry's horrible actions of spiraling prices up they are begging to be regulated and Trump may be the guy to put some sanity back in this abusive industry.

a reply to: seasonal

The fact that a lot of what Shkreli posted is unverified/unverifiable shows he's just trying to get attention. Ever since he got called out for jacking up the price of AIDS medication that has been his MO.

Is there an issue with drug prices in this country? God yes. When a pharmaceutical company is charging hundreds of dollars for a pill that university students can make for $6 I'd say there's an issue. The only ways to change it though are: A.) Single payer system or B.) Heavily regulating the entire healthcare system.

Both of these methods are very socialist in nature and seemingly go against the philosophy Trump portrays. Even if it didn't it definitely goes against the philosophy of the GOP.

a reply to: Xcalibur254

Believe me, if you knew the hurdles a medication has to go through to be classified as safe both pre and post production, you wouldn't be so glib.

The primary cost of a drug has never been the base cost of assembly, but all the numerous tests and verifications that must be done at every step of the process to satisfy every single watchdog group and org that it is safe.

They even run numerous tests of chemically inert, sterile water and have to produce reams of documentation to all the relevant agencies to prove that it was done. None of this is easy or cheap, and it must be done at every stage an ingredient goes through.

And for every market a manufacturer sells in, there are very different sets of standards that must be met set by every country's own regulatory agency.

And all of this is before we even talk about the R&D issue and process involved there.

Some countries also undercut the companies by yanking patents on anything they deem too expensive and allowing generic companies to begin production without the R&D costs factored in which does come closer to "uni students making it for $6" but it still doesn't quite compute if they want to meet safety standards and that does push costs even higher.

R&D costs money and that costs even more with the approval process regulated the way it is.

3 . . . 2 . . . 1 . . .

Libel lawsuit.

a reply to: Xcalibur254

Heavy regulation is supposed to happen to protect the citizens. If the pharma companies were being "fair" this wouldn't be an issue.

I don't see this as being socialistic, it is realistic.

a reply to: ketsuko

I think most people are concerned with the 35 year old generic that is has shot up 600% in the last 5 years. Or insulin, I have read stories on how companies are raising the price 100% every year, for the last 3-4.

a reply to: seasonal

Yea that shouldn't happen

If its generic and still expensive it means its being regulated tightly as someone should be able to make some cheap batches.

I know asthma inhalers stayed way up in price because the Ozone, The CFC legislation gave a reason to patent new delivery systems since the old ones used CFC's and were banned. a joke.

a reply to: jellyrev

I hat to say regulate the business, but they are shoving it right in the consumers face. Epipen?

a reply to: jellyrev

The inhaler change made a 200% price increase, based on what someone here was paying.