←back to thread

FTC challenges 'junk' patents held by 10 drugmakers, incl Novo Nordisk's Ozempic

(www.cnbc.com)
152 points toomuchtodo | 1 comments | 30 Apr 24 21:06 UTC | HN request time: 0.207s | source
Show context
akira2501 ◴[30 Apr 24 21:33 UTC] No.40216636[source]▶
Good.

They patented inhalers for a second time. It's the exact same drug. The only thing that changed was the propellant. It went from R-12 to R-134a. Everyone who had to switch out R-12 from refrigeration to drug manufacturing switched to R-134a. There was absolutely _nothing_ novel about it.

It was _criminal_ to allow them the second patent for just the propellant change. It took generic $5 inhalers off the market and replaced them with $95 inhalers. It was was one of the most corrupt swindles I've ever personally seen.

replies(4): >>40216858 #>>40216885 #>>40217053 #>>40241727 #
RheingoldRiver ◴[30 Apr 24 21:52 UTC] No.40216858[source]▶
> It took generic $5 inhalers off the market and replaced them with $95 inhalers.

OOTL, what is stopping companies from making generics of the older version & patients just not using the new version?

replies(4): >>40216891 #>>40216937 #>>40216991 #>>40217174 #
chemeng ◴[30 Apr 24 21:55 UTC] No.40216891[source]▶
It is illegal to use the previous propellant, so they can’t be manufactured anymore.
replies(1): >>40216938 #
chroma ◴[30 Apr 24 22:00 UTC] No.40216938[source]▶
Where can I read more about this? If that’s true, it seems like a problem of over-regulation, not drug companies being exploitative.
replies(7): >>40216969 #>>40216978 #>>40216994 #>>40217022 #>>40217064 #>>40217065 #>>40217119 #
striking ◴[30 Apr 24 22:03 UTC] No.40216978[source]▶
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dichlorodifluoromethane

> In compliance with the Montreal Protocol, its manufacture was banned in developed countries (non-article 5 countries) in 1996, and in developing countries (Article 5 countries) in 2010 out of concerns about its damaging effect on the ozone layer.

Seems a reasonable regulation to me.

replies(1): >>40217286 #
prepend ◴[30 Apr 24 22:37 UTC] No.40217286[source]▶
Not reasonable if it prevents the minuscule amounts required for inhalers.

A more nuanced regulation would limit the production volume if there are still valid use cases.

replies(2): >>40217514 #>>40218665 #
1. CaliforniaKarl ◴[01 May 24 01:52 UTC] No.40218665[source]▶
You might not get the price-benefits you expect.

If the only remaining allowed use for R-12 is in inhalers, the manufacturing volume might be so low that you end up in a similar situation to today: Fewer manufacturers (likely just one), higher prices, and supply-chain issues.