Well, that didn't take long at all. Drug CEO Will Lower Price of Daraprim After Hike Sparked Outrage.
Daraprim was previously discussed on SoylentNews today.
I'd still like to see a good generic alternative become available so that this can't happen again.
takyon: Also at BBC. Martin Shkreli has not said how much the price will be cut, and is planning to make his Twitter account private, according to NBC. Daraprim's chemical name is Pyrimethamine, aka 5-(4-Chlorophenyl)-6-(diethoxymethyl)-2,4-pyrimidinediamine.
Related Stories
His early release reflects good behavior and completion of rehabilitation programs
Infamous ex-pharmaceutical executive Martin Shkreli has been released from federal prison after serving less than five years of a seven-year sentence for a securities and wire fraud conviction. He is now moving into a US Bureau of Prisons halfway house at an undisclosed location in New York until September 14, 2022.
Shkreli was convicted in August 2017 on two counts of securities fraud and one count of conspiracy to commit securities fraud in connection to what federal prosecutors called a Ponzi-like scheme involving two hedge funds Shkreli managed. In March 2018, a federal judge sentenced him to seven years, which he was serving in minimum security federal prison in Allenwood, Pennsylvania.
His early release—slightly more than four years after his sentencing—reflects time shaved off for good behavior in prison, plus completion of education and rehabilitation programs, according to CNBC. It also includes a credit for the roughly six months he spent in jail prior to his sentencing.
Previously on SoylentNews:
United States Sells Unique Wu-Tang Clan Album Forfeited by Martin Shkreli
Judge Denies Shkreli's "Delusional Self-Aggrandizing" Plea to Get Out of Jail
Shkreli Stays in Jail; Infamous Ex-Pharma CEO Quickly Loses Appeal
Martin Shkreli Accused of Running Business From Prison With a Smuggled Smartphone
Sobbing Martin Shkreli Sentenced to 7 Years in Prison for Defrauding Investors
Britain Fines Pfizer Record £84.2m for 2600% Drug Price Hike
Daraprim Price Lowered in Response to Outrage
Cost of Daraprim Medication Raised by Over 50 Times
The ABC news website (an Australian national news service funded by the Australian government) reports on a group of high school students from Sydney Australia who have managed to recreate the active ingredient in Daraprim for a mere $20.
Daraprim has received a lot of coverage recently after Turing Pharmaceuticals who owns the patent, initially raised the price of the drug from $13.50 to $750.00, though they have since stated that the price will be reduced.
From the article:
For $US20, a group of high school students has created 3.7 grams of an active ingredient used in the medicine Daraprim, which would sell in the United States for between $US35,000 and $US110,000.
Pyrimethamine, the active ingredient in Daraprim, treats a parasitic infection in people with weak immune systems such as pregnant women and HIV patients.
In August 2015, the price of Daraprim in the US rose from $US13.50 per tablet to $US750 when Turing Pharmaceuticals, and its controversial then-chief executive Martin Shkreli, acquired the drug's exclusive rights and hiked up the price.
Since then, the 17-year-olds from Sydney Grammar have worked in their school laboratory to create the drug cheaply in order to draw attention to its inflated price overseas, which student Milan Leonard said was "ridiculous".
The ABC news website (an Australian national news service funded by the Australian government) reports on a group of high school students from Sydney Australia who have managed to recreate the active ingredient in Daraprim for a mere $20.
Daraprim has received a lot of coverage recently after Turing Pharmaceuticals who owns the patent, initially raised the price of the drug from $13.50 to $750.00, though they have since stated that the price will be reduced.
From the article:
For $US20, a group of high school students has created 3.7 grams of an active ingredient used in the medicine Daraprim, which would sell in the United States for between $US35,000 and $US110,000.
Pyrimethamine, the active ingredient in Daraprim, treats a parasitic infection in people with weak immune systems such as pregnant women and HIV patients.
In August 2015, the price of Daraprim in the US rose from $US13.50 per tablet to $US750 when Turing Pharmaceuticals, and its controversial then-chief executive Martin Shkreli, acquired the drug's exclusive rights and hiked up the price.
Since then, the 17-year-olds from Sydney Grammar have worked in their school laboratory to create the drug cheaply in order to draw attention to its inflated price overseas, which student Milan Leonard said was "ridiculous".
Medicine that costs $1 to make raised in price from $13.50 to $750.00
The head of a US pharmaceutical company has defended his company's decision to raise the price of a 62-year-old medication used by Aids patients by over 5,000%. Turing Pharmaceuticals acquired the rights to Daraprim in August.
CEO Martin Shkreli has said that the company will use the money it makes from sales to research new treatments. The drug is used treat toxoplasmosis, a parasitic affliction that affects people with compromised immune systems.
After Turning's acquisition, a dose of Daraprim in the US increased from $13.50 (£8.70) to $750. The pill costs about $1 to produce, but Mr Shkreli, a former hedge fund manager, said that does not include other costs like marketing and distribution.
Cost of Daraprim Medication Raised By Over 50 Times
BBC is reporting on a massive price hike of an essential drug used by AIDS patients:
The head of a US pharmaceutical company has defended his company's decision to raise the price of a 62-year-old medication used by Aids patients by over 5,000%. Turing Pharmaceuticals acquired the rights to Daraprim in August. CEO Martin Shkreli has said that the company will use the money it makes from sales to research new treatments.
The drug is used treat toxoplasmosis, a parasitic affliction that affects people with compromised immune systems. After Turning's acquisition, a dose of Daraprim in the US increased from $13.50 (£8.70) to $750. The pill costs about $1 to produce, but Mr Shkreli, a former hedge fund manager, said that does not include other costs like marketing and distribution. "We needed to turn a profit on this drug," Mr Shkreli told Bloomberg TV. "The companies before us were just giving it away almost." On Twitter, Mr Shkreli mocked several users who questioned the company's decision, calling one reporter "a moron".
Why not switch to a generic pyrimethamine tablet? They don't exist right now, according to the New York Times (story includes examples of other recent price hikes):
With the price now high, other companies could conceivably make generic copies, since patents have long expired. One factor that could discourage that option is that Daraprim's distribution is now tightly controlled, making it harder for generic companies to get the samples they need for the required testing.
The switch from drugstores to controlled distribution was made in June by Impax, not by Turing. Still, controlled distribution was a strategy Mr. Shkreli talked about at his previous company as a way to thwart generics.
The drug is also used to treat malaria and appears on the World Health Organization Model List of Essential Medicines. Toxoplasmosis infections are a feline gift to the world.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday September 23 2015, @02:29AM
"It's very easy to see a large drug price increase and say 'Gosh, those people must be gouging.' But when you find out that the company is not really making any money, what does that mean?" Shkreli said in a phone interview with NBC News Tuesday. "It's very hard stuff to understand."
So, he passed university Doublespeak with flying colors. All 4 years of undergrad, plus a couple years of post-grad.
“I have become friends with many school shooters” - Tampon Tim Walz
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Francis on Wednesday September 23 2015, @02:31AM
Indeed, it would raise questions about how the previous company was able to afford to produce the medication if it required that size of an increase to make it profitable.
Most likely, it was just a complete lie.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Wednesday September 23 2015, @04:43AM
Supposedly it cost a buck to make a dose, and they were selling for something like 13 bucks.
So something that cheap to make selling for 13 times cost means it was already profitable.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Tork on Wednesday September 23 2015, @05:05AM
So something that cheap to make selling for 13 times cost means it was already profitable.
Just being a little pedantic here but, no, this is not true. You have to know how much money went into researching this product and how much they can actually charge and still sell it.
You may very well be right in this particular case, but it's also possible they wouldn't have been profitable for quite a while. It's possible they only sold it that cheap because of pressure from the insurance companies.
🏳️🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️🌈
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 23 2015, @06:54AM
You have to know how much money went into researching this product and how much they can actually charge and still sell it.
From what I've heard, it's a 60-year-old drug that cost about a dollar a few years ago. Since they wouldn't sell it at a loss, that's your maximum cost of production, with the R&D costs recouped decades ago. The rights were sold a few times, and each time the price was raised until it reached the $13-ish price point... and then this SOB raised it ~5000%.
Someone here or on Techdirt calculated the approximate profit: if everyone whose life depends on the pill was able to buy it for $750-a-pill, his one year revenue would be on the order of $1.5 BILLION. Costs of production... somewhere around $2 million. So fuck this guy with a rusty spatula.
(Score: 2) by Adamsjas on Wednesday September 23 2015, @07:13AM
Turns out the guy was a young executive, in his first CEO position. He had very limited experience and made a humongous public relations blunder. Or so it seems. I doubt even HE could have expected to get away with this kind of a raise forever.
He had the sense to reverse it within one day, and I wonder if that wasn't part of a plan.
Maybe he wanted to get rid of this product line all together.
Because of this incident, some generic drug maker with excess production capability will probably jump into this market and take it away from him by undercutting his price.
(Score: 5, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 23 2015, @08:04AM
If true, that'd be great, wouldn't it? Unfortunately, it doesn't seem to be.
Turns out the guy was a young executive, in his first CEO position. He had very limited experience and made a humongous public relations blunder.
Completely false. His previous company, Retrophin, pulled similar crap [wikipedia.org]:
In September 2014 Retrophin acquired the rights to thiola, a drug used to treat the rare disease cystinuria. It was with Shkreli as CEO that Retrophin introduced a 20-fold price increase for Thiola, despite no additional research and development costs incurred by obtaining these rights.
Also, killing hundreds or thousands of people by rising the price of drugs their life depends on only to raise your profits from "high" to "obscene" is not exactly a "public relations blunder". More like something you get a dedicated circle of hell for.
Maybe he wanted to get rid of this product line all together.
He bought the rights to this one drug from another company, so that makes no sense at all. Unless he has a particular vendetta against this one drug.
Because of this incident, some generic drug maker with excess production capability will probably jump into this market and take it away from him by undercutting his price.
That will take time and money. They need to reverse engineer it and prove to the FDA that it is indeed the same drug, through testing and whatnot. Additionally, the distribution is tightly controlled so it would be difficult to get samples to analyze. We're looking at at least a year or two for the whole process, and in the meantime people are dying and the asshole in charge is getting richer. To top it off, once someone puts an alternative on the market, what's stopping the asshole in lowering the price so much they would never recoup R&D costs? After all, his investment (ie, buying the rights) would be repaid many times over by then.
(Score: 2) by Adamsjas on Wednesday September 23 2015, @05:31PM
Generic producing companies do not need samples. The complete fomumula is in the patent documents as someone else pointed out. And nothing is that tightly controlled. Even prescription drugs can be made available for research use. You can't really refuse to sell to pharmacies just because you think a pill might fall into the competition's hands.
(Score: 2) by HiThere on Wednesday September 23 2015, @07:21PM
IIUC, US law is such that a generic drug cannot be sold without testing to ensure that it is as effective as the proprietary version. And testing here means selecting groups of patients and doing double-blind sampling over a period of time (I'm not sure how long, but years wouldn't surprise me). In order to make this impossible the holder of the proprietary drug decided to not sell the drug through drug stores.
I cannot think of a punishment vile enough to balance this act...if one believes that a punishment can balance an intentional act of evil. ( originally wrote "...of intentional evil.", but I suspect this guy is enough of a sociopath that he doesn't intend evil, he just doesn't care whether it's evil or not.)
That said, I believe that he should immediately be fired and legally prevented from ever again holding a position of decision making authority in any publicly traded or regulated business, or in government. There's no way to do this, of course, but that's the only proper response to his action.
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: 2) by Adamsjas on Thursday September 24 2015, @12:34AM
Do you have a citation saying he won't sell through drug stores?
Because in this country, that is how its done. There is almost no alternative.
(Score: 2) by HiThere on Thursday September 24 2015, @01:09AM
source: https://soylentnews.org/article.pl?sid=15/09/22/0843239 [soylentnews.org]
which was quoting http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/21/business/a-huge-overnight-increase-in-a-drugs-price-raises-protests.html [nytimes.com] , though I admit I didn't read the original story.
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday September 23 2015, @01:53PM
Yeah, I was thinking about this on the drive to work last night. "Is this part of a plan?" I says to myself, "No, stupid, he was just being stupid!" And, myself answers, "Maybe he just wanted to shock us with something outrageous like this, so that next month, he can get away with something else, just somewhat less outrageous!"
“I have become friends with many school shooters” - Tampon Tim Walz
(Score: 2) by Adamsjas on Wednesday September 23 2015, @05:37PM
Maybe he really thought it would go un-noticed? Maybe he looked at this drug as a loss-leader, and was raising the price on other drugs less, so as not to be noticed.
Its a 60 year old drug, long out of patent protection.
(Score: 2) by davester666 on Wednesday September 23 2015, @06:31AM
It takes $12/pill to convince anybody to take it.
(Score: 1) by Francis on Wednesday September 23 2015, @03:28PM
There's distribution costs in there as well, but all the costs involved wouldn't be changing by that much that quickly. It was a money-grab and a rather sickening one at that.
Dick moves like this are a large part of why people hate rich people.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by penguinoid on Wednesday September 23 2015, @02:32AM
I'll applaud him the same as I applaud patent trolls. Make sure everyone knows things are good and broken. Sometimes the problem is not primarily the jerk exploiting the law, but the jerks who bought the law from the jerks who wrote the law.
RIP Slashdot. Killed by greedy bastards.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Grishnakh on Wednesday September 23 2015, @03:26AM
You have a point here, but unfortunately, the counterpoint is that we already know things are good and broken, but no one's fixing them. We've been watching patent trolls make a mockery of the judicial system for years and years and years now, and has anyone in Congress tried fixing the situation? Hell no.
(Score: 2, Redundant) by jdavidb on Wednesday September 23 2015, @02:36AM
"Pyrimethamine"? That's that stuff I could make out of sudafed, if they still let me buy sudafed, right?
ⓋⒶ☮✝🕊 Secession is the right of all sentient beings
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anne Nonymous on Wednesday September 23 2015, @03:09AM
I'm all for making a profit, but somebody ought to stab that guy in the face with a needle full of AIDS blood.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by gman003 on Wednesday September 23 2015, @03:19AM
If the newly-"cut" price is anything more than it was selling for before Turing bought the rights to Daraprim, he still wins. Don't let that happen. If it's so much as a cent higher, drag his name back into the mud.
(Score: 2) by tathra on Wednesday September 23 2015, @03:43AM
just what i was thinking. what's he going to lower it to, $500? $100? still price gouging and ripping off vulnerable, sick people. in fact, the 'new' price should be even lower than it used to be if he doesn't want his name to continued to be smeared. its the obvious "compromise" scam - always list ridiculous, impossible things in your demands along with what you really want, or say double what you're really trying to get, that way you can appear to "compromise" and get what you were wanting in the first place.
"Oh, $750 is too much? Alight, you win, we've lowered the price to $200 in response to your outcry." expect to see the press report next week, once people have had a chance to forget how much it originally cost.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Whoever on Wednesday September 23 2015, @03:51AM
It's entirely possible that he has already won, with a massive short against big Pharma companies. It's possible that his action was designed to cause the outrage, with the consequent drop in stock price for big Pharma companies.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by TheRaven on Wednesday September 23 2015, @08:47AM
sudo mod me up
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 23 2015, @03:42AM
Is this a success of capitalism? It could be the old ask for way more than you are willing to sell for and then settle for the real price.
(Score: 5, Informative) by Tork on Wednesday September 23 2015, @05:02AM
So is this a 'win' for Capitalism? Judging from the reaction this is getting, no. It's a step towards killing it.
🏳️🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️🌈
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 23 2015, @05:53AM
I don't know, it would depend on the evidence for the cure. In 24 hours you can't learn much, probably nothing while sick like that. Unless I had previous experience of it working I might be more scared of the cure.
(Score: 1) by What planet is this on Wednesday September 23 2015, @01:49PM
Supply and demand? Where have you been. Selling stuff is based on "What the market will bear." Which is exactly what this ass was counting on only to find that people are getting tired of this kind of sociopathic crap. Need a pill to keep you alive and kicking? Here it is. Now pay up.
(Score: 2) by Tork on Wednesday September 23 2015, @03:22PM
🏳️🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️🌈
(Score: 2) by Adamsjas on Wednesday September 23 2015, @05:55PM
This isn't a case where supply and demand played a big part.
Its a 60 year old medicine for a disease that many are infected with, but for which very few need treatment, (Daraprim treats toxoplasmosis, but is not the drug of choice for this). He has no patent protection. His market is not growing, because there are other better newer drugs.
This is why the move is so confusing unless you assume it was nothing but a money grab.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 23 2015, @06:59AM
The whole premise of capitalism is supposed to be companies competing on price for goods to the benefit of the customer. But companies aren't stupid and have realized there is a whole lot more money to be made by not competing than engaging in a race to the bottom. When the thing that's making a company fix their prices was likely their CEO beginning to fear for his personal safety (think about how many death threats, implied and explicit, he received) from an angered society, capitalism has completely failed.
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Wednesday September 23 2015, @10:23PM
My first thought with this story was that the guy just painted a big target on his back, and well he ought to. People with terminal conditions frequently have lower impulse control, as do the friends and family in anguish through watching their loved ones suffer.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by mendax on Wednesday September 23 2015, @04:34AM
The CEO of the company still has a place waiting for him in an inner ring of Hell, and Satan is still waiting for him to become his latest prison bitch.
It's really quite a simple choice: Life, Death, or Los Angeles.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 23 2015, @05:02AM
It's not about a single jackass. It's structural. There is nothing to prevent some other asshole pulling the same stunt, and there are others who are pulling this stunt.
It's market/regulatory issue, and it needs to be addressed.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday September 23 2015, @02:01PM
Exactly. He could have done this, slicker than snot on a door handle, if he had been less greedy. Had he bought these rights, and raised the price to $25 instead of $750, people would have grumbled a little bit, and paid. Had he raised the price to $50, there would have been a little more grumbling. He MIGHT have got away with raising the price tenfold, making it $130, had he been prepared to offer excuses, reasons, rationalizations, or whatever. And, you're right, it happens all the time. And, mostly, the insurance companies ante up, and pay for it, passing the costs on, in the form of higher insurance rates.
“I have become friends with many school shooters” - Tampon Tim Walz
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 23 2015, @06:05PM
This story is quite odd, it is starting to look like it is due to political scheming. It seems like a perfect a set up for certain US presidential candidates to comment upon (Hilary Clinton).
(Score: 2) by fritsd on Wednesday September 23 2015, @07:35PM
Really? So there are presidential candidates who wouldn't denounce this guy's despicable sociopathic act of greed, for their own political gain ("if I were president, this would never happen, because...")?
Who? Which candidate would side with "poor, misunderstood" mr. Shkreli in this case? I'm curious.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 23 2015, @07:52PM
I don't really follow that stuff anymore, but shes the only one I heard had anything to say about it. The real issue is this story doesn't make much sense, it seems like something else is going on.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 24 2015, @02:35AM
Even Trump denounced him, calling him a disgrace, a zero.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 23 2015, @09:10PM
Romney:
Companies are people my friend.
Sure maybe he isnt running this time, but his mind set is still strong in certain parts of the political spectrum.