GOVERNMENT BLACKMAIL?

For those of you who follow medical breakthroughs there's been some controversy of late about Gilead Sciences, the big biotech firm, that just came out with an apparent cure for Hepatitis C.

The controversy is not about whether the drug, Solvaldi, works or its possible untoward side effects, what's known in the industry as effective and efficacious. It's about something bigger, money. The treatment costs $84,000 for a full course of the remedy.

Now Oregon's got some funny ways to begin with. But we'll leave that for another time. Gilead is not alone in this area. It has competitors who will soon be bringing similar drugs to market. What remains in question is another key word related to the green stuff, price.Where on the scale will Gilead's competitors price their drug?

Oregon already gets a federally mandated discount or rebate from Gilead on Solvaldi of about 23%. Two of the drug companies competing for market share are Merck and AbbVie. AbbVie  has said it expects its drug to clear FDA approval around October this year.

AbbVie's CEO Richard Gonzalez has reportedly stated his firm "will compete with Gilead on the merits of its drug, and not on price."  Though it isn't clear yet who will meet the criteria for treatment, cost of the treatment is already on the front burner of discussion.

According to the Wall Street Journal, "The head of pharmaceutical drug purchasing for Oregon’s Medicaid program has a message to hepatitis C drug makers: Let’s make a deal." In trying to severely restrict the drug's use and hold costs down, Thomas Burns, pharmacy director for Oregon Health Authority, noted:
 
If the drugs work similarly, we can say to the companies, ‘Only one of you will get to do business with the state of Oregon. Which one of you wants to give the right price?’” Burns doesn't reveal just who gets to determine the "right price," but one can only guess it's not in the eyes of the drug companies if Burns has his way.

 The number of people in the U.S. with Hep C is estimated at around 4 million. Again according to the WSJ: 

Most states are required under federal law to reimburse all FDA-approved drugs, but Burns notes that Oregon operates under a federal waiver that allows it to exclude certain therapies from its coverage in exchange for providing health services to a wider population than mandated by law.
 
Oregon estimates that some 1,450 Oregon Medicaid beneficiaries would be candidates for Sovaldi under current state guidelines, which would cost the state about $160 million after including the price tag for other therapies that are currently combined with Sovaldi.

Burns apparently has decided to take a page from AIDs activists by trying to link the price of the drug to the pay and bonuses Gilead''s CEO, John Martin, received in 2013, emotionally staggering figures for many designed to pander to those who hate corporate America. Martin last year took in $15 million in salary and exercised stock options on the company worth an estimated $159 million dollars.

Burns didn't stop there. He threw in this kicker: “We fail to understand why they think the taxpayers of Oregon ought to finance their CEO’s salary.” This of course is bogus but emotionally effective rhetoric since Gilead sells more than one product and does so around the globe.

The lines keep getting clearer and clearer. It matters little whether it's fracking, global warming, health care, same-sex marriage, gridlock, taxes, spying, foreign policy or whatever. This is a divided society. And one that could get really ugly in a hurry.

There are many forms of blackmail. The current Justice Department's, some are saying, "greedy fines" against several financial firms is just one example.
c.c chance