Medical Costs - Pfizer fined $2.3Bn

[dieseltaylor]

It s interesting to see the corruption in payments to providers -

http://www.NaturalNews.com/026963_Pfizer_Bextra_health.html

http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/2009/September/09-aag-900.html

Essentially, Pfizer asked the FDA to approve Bextra for a variety of diseases and conditions, and when the FDA refused those approvals, Pfizer decided to go ahead and market the drugs for those diseases and conditions anyway (off-label marketing).

In the DOJ statement:

Pfizer has agreed to pay $1 billion to resolve allegations under the civil False Claims Act that the company illegally promoted four drugs -- Bextra; Geodon, an anti-psychotic drug; Zyvox, an antibiotic; and Lyrica, an anti-epileptic drug -- and caused false claims to be submitted to government health care programs for uses that were not medically accepted indications and therefore not covered by those programs. The civil settlement also resolves allegations that Pfizer paid kickbacks to health care providers to induce them to prescribe these, as well as other, drugs. The federal share of the civil settlement is $668,514,830 and the state Medicaid share of the civil settlement is $331,485,170. This is the largest civil fraud settlement in history against a pharmaceutical company.

False claims, kickbacks, felony crimes and civil fraud... it seems that the truth about pharmaceutical companies like Pfizer is finally starting to emerge.

It does seem to me that there should also be criminal charges against the executives of the company. To fine a company seems to miss the point that it is individuals who make the decisions. This judgement seems to confirm that people who commision fraudulent or illegal actions by a company are immune from personal liability/punishment.

[Michael Emrys]

It does seem to me that there should also be criminal charges against the executives of the company. To fine a company seems to miss the point that it is individuals who make the decisions. This judgement seems to confirm that people who commision fraudulent or illegal actions by a company are immune from personal liability/punishment.

I agree. It's one of the major failings of our legal system at the moment. But nothing will happen unless there is a really big and lasting uproar over the issue. With the huge sums of money that have already been spent to finesse the issue, don't expect to see any serious movement any time soon. Too many people with too much power have vested interests in maintaining the status quo.

Michael

[costard]

I'd expect the stockholders will be having words with their executive. Sombre, serious words. And I would expect to see an inquiry on what confidential information (intellectual property of the company, remember) was given in exchange for not pressing on with filing charges. Get 'em on failure of duty to the shareholders. They'll have an expensive time of it, for sure.

[dieseltaylor]

Unfortunately shareholders have little real power. Furthermore the people who took the decisions may have been senior enough to be retired or have moved upwards to other companies. The state needs to punish the decision makers.

They do in Japan : )

PS - was in the Corvair that was known to be dangerous and the manufacturer decided to keep building and pay for any deaths.? No it was the Ford Pinto!

They shoot horses, don't they? Well, this is fish in a barrel. Of course the Pinto goes on the Worst list, but not because it was a particularly bad car — not particularly — but because it had a rather volatile nature. The car tended to erupt in flame in rear-end collisions. The Pinto is at the end of one of autodom's most notorious paper trails, the Ford Pinto memo , which ruthlessly calculates the cost of reinforcing the rear end ($121 million) versus the potential payout to victims ($50 million). Conclusion? Let 'em burn.

[costard]

...and they were done for "punitive damages" (something like $350 million?). But it didn't sink the company.

Shareholders own the bloody company. If they can't fire, and hold people responsible, who can? They get to vote on a change to a company's constitution, they could vote to change it back to the way it was before the crooks took charge. And then pass a motion to wipe out the crooks. Good luck to them.

Our democracies have shied from holding decision makers responsible because we've found we only ever get bureaucrats running for election if we do (a notable shift in the late nineties over here). Oh, wait... no, that didn't work either. It turns out we're all complicit for actions taken under our nation's flag. Best to have good leaders.