Make the best choices for your Medicare needs with AARP’s Medicare Made Easy. Try it today!

Reply
Valued Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
158
Views

Re: Now We Know Why There is That "Anti-Kickback" Provision in the Medicare Prescription D

158 Views
Message 1 of 4

@GailL1 wrote:

@john258 wrote:


 


If we did what other countries do and controlled the prices the problem is solved. We would still have the drug, and we would still get new ones. The top people might  be paid less and that would be good.

By the way saw the next Gov. of your state  on TV the other night after her win in the primary. She sounded great. Quite a change for the better from what you have now.


If we control the prices like other countries do - I have no problem with it.  But people need to make sure what this might mean to what is currently available and the restrictions that come with the differing approval method and cost containment..

 

As to the GA. elections - She hasn't won yet - that was just the Primary.


With the proper rules and oversight by Fed. and State Govt. there would be no problem in doing that. We have done it for years with water, electric, etc. I know she just won the Primary, but how could any thinking person vote for the current Lt. Gov. He wanted to throw Delta out of the state for cancelling an NRA discount that only 12 people used, and the would have cost GA about 40,000 jobs.

Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
158
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
169
Views

Re: Now We Know Why There is That "Anti-Kickback" Provision in the Medicare Prescription D

169 Views
Message 2 of 4

@john258 wrote:


 


If we did what other countries do and controlled the prices the problem is solved. We would still have the drug, and we would still get new ones. The top people might  be paid less and that would be good.

By the way saw the next Gov. of your state  on TV the other night after her win in the primary. She sounded great. Quite a change for the better from what you have now.


If we control the prices like other countries do - I have no problem with it.  But people need to make sure what this might mean to what is currently available and the restrictions that come with the differing approval method and cost containment..

 

As to the GA. elections - She hasn't won yet - that was just the Primary.

* * * * It's Always Something . . . Roseanne Roseannadanna
Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
169
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
210
Views

Re: Now We Know Why There is That "Anti-Kickback" Provision in the Medicare Prescription D

210 Views
Message 3 of 4

@GailL1wrote:

The Anti-Kickback Statute exists to protect Medicare, and the taxpayers who fund it, from schemes like these:

 

KHN 05.24.2018 - Pfizer Settles Kickback Case Related To Copay Assistance For $24M

 

Pfizer will pay the government nearly $24 million as part of a settlement to resolve allegations that it funneled money through a foundation resulting in illegal kickbacks.

 

The company is not admitting wrongdoing or liability as part of its agreement with the Department of Justice.

 

According to the settlement, from 2012 through 2016, Pfizer made donations to the Patient Access Network (PAN) Foundation, a copay assistance nonprofit organization, and then used a specialty pharmacy to steer Medicare patients taking its drugs toward the foundation to cover their copays. . . . .

 

. . . . Drugmakers can’t directly offer copay assistance to Medicare or Medicaid beneficiaries under federal law. The concern is that covering such out-of-pocket costs for expensive drugs still leaves taxpayers with the bill for the remainder of the costs. Congress didn’t want beneficiaries to be shielded from price increases, allowing drugmakers to increase prices without risking that patients will switch to cheaper alternatives. . . . .

 

. . . . .The chemotherapy drugs at the center of the alleged scheme were Sutent, which treats kidney cancer and other cancerous tumors, and Inlyta, which also treats kidney cancer.

 

Sutent cost Medicare Part D $183 million in 2016 before rebates, or about $47,000 per patient. Medicare’s spending for each unit of this drug had increased by 80 percent since the illegal conduct allegedly began in 2012. Inlyta cost Medicare about $73 million in 2016, or about $57,000 per patient. Medicare spent 34 percent more on each unit of the drug in 2016 than it did in 2012.

 


If we did what other countries do and controlled the prices the problem is solved. We would still have the drug, and we would still get new ones. The top people might  be paid less and that would be good.

By the way saw the next Gov. of your state  on TV the other night after her win in the primary. She sounded great. Quite a change for the better from what you have now.

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
210
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
3
Kudos
237
Views
3
Replies

Now We Know Why There is That "Anti-Kickback" Provision in the Medicare Prescription Drug Program

237 Views
Message 4 of 4

The Anti-Kickback Statute exists to protect Medicare, and the taxpayers who fund it, from schemes like these:

 

KHN 05.24.2018 - Pfizer Settles Kickback Case Related To Copay Assistance For $24M

 

Pfizer will pay the government nearly $24 million as part of a settlement to resolve allegations that it funneled money through a foundation resulting in illegal kickbacks.

 

The company is not admitting wrongdoing or liability as part of its agreement with the Department of Justice.

 

According to the settlement, from 2012 through 2016, Pfizer made donations to the Patient Access Network (PAN) Foundation, a copay assistance nonprofit organization, and then used a specialty pharmacy to steer Medicare patients taking its drugs toward the foundation to cover their copays. . . . .

 

. . . . Drugmakers can’t directly offer copay assistance to Medicare or Medicaid beneficiaries under federal law. The concern is that covering such out-of-pocket costs for expensive drugs still leaves taxpayers with the bill for the remainder of the costs. Congress didn’t want beneficiaries to be shielded from price increases, allowing drugmakers to increase prices without risking that patients will switch to cheaper alternatives. . . . .

 

. . . . .The chemotherapy drugs at the center of the alleged scheme were Sutent, which treats kidney cancer and other cancerous tumors, and Inlyta, which also treats kidney cancer.

 

Sutent cost Medicare Part D $183 million in 2016 before rebates, or about $47,000 per patient. Medicare’s spending for each unit of this drug had increased by 80 percent since the illegal conduct allegedly began in 2012. Inlyta cost Medicare about $73 million in 2016, or about $57,000 per patient. Medicare spent 34 percent more on each unit of the drug in 2016 than it did in 2012.

 

* * * * It's Always Something . . . Roseanne Roseannadanna
Report Inappropriate Content
3
Kudos
237
Views
3
Replies