If it would have taken a billion dollars in legal fees to prove your innocence, I'm going to take a chance and suggest that these claims likely weren't "false".
A very thought-provoking movie, but definitely not a good choice for "date night".
Money means nothing if they get charged a fraction of what they made in profits...
Also there’s a very high ROI and not very often discussed career path: Work in sales at big pharma company or home health care company or really any compare that bills Medicare, find False Claim Act violations and a lawyer to represent you, and collect 15-30% of settlement (should be 8 to 9 figures if you played your cards right).
“The Pharmacist” on Netflix really opened my eye to how above the law doctors are.
I do have concerns about how easy it is for some specialists to create a gravy train for themselves by simply requiring regular 'assessment' visits for patients under their care or observation at what seems to be a ludicrous rate for five minutes of their time.
In the UK there is an ombudsman that people can report their concerns to, but what then? - How anonymous is the patient really and how significantly do they compromise their relationship with what is actually a small pool of people who all know each other and are subject to the pressures of their professional clique's members?
How can this be improved, because even if they are sure that they are being overcharged and poorly treated there is still an incentive for patients not to go up against the medical establishment?
Pricing transparency is one thing which can help, but if there is a departure from the 'expected' level, then what? Is the right thing to do simply for the patient to always assess the rate vs service and report anything which is an outlier without concern for potential downstream consequences from their specialists? Or does pragmatism prevail, even if it perpetuates poor behaviour by the medical professionals?
I’m very stoked for this guy though and curious what his cut is and how that is determined. Any ideas?
I blame the ones that take the money.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Not only not going to jail, but didn't even acknowledge any wrongdoing.
So obviously if Abbott tries to poison me again, like I'm going to read the brand name, dude get real, woafs (wastes of a fuck) will poison you until they get shut down...or until they get told "your company is imprisoned, all your staff have to work out of a prison every day under surveillance, cavity search daily, no quitting no hiring, it's forced labor like ordinary prison, you go home at night, that's what you get, anybody who didn't denounce it". The real corporate jail penalty.
Only survivor in the rehab. Only one who didn't gain 40 pounds. The alpha.
EDIT: downvotes are upvotes. So what I say sounds like paranoid or whatever but yeah duh that's how I didn't get fat. Only the paranoid survive? Only the paranoid stay skinny.
I've never been in a position to be recommended or asked to take such drugs, but from my study of them I'm pretty sure I'd personally have probably chosen to risk dealing with reality on its own terms. Certainly a difficult choice.
The Fed gets $250MM, and he gets an unlisted percent of that amount.
He’s not getting $250MM.
The rest seems to be going to the states.
> Under the terms of the settlement, Biogen will pay $843,805,187 to the United States and $56,194,813 to 15 states.
2010-June-30: $1094M
2011-June-30: $1076M
2012-June-30: $1342M
2013-June-30: $1608M
2014-June-30: $2140M
2015-June-30: $3490M
Also, because someone asked, edgar has a bar chart breakdown of Biogen's product revenue. The lawsuit was about Biogen's drugs Avonex, Tysabri and Tecfidera. The bar chart (https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/875045/0000875045150...) seems to indicate that these three were responsible for about 80-83% of Biogen's revenues (and presumably net income?) in 2014.
I guess what we don't know is what their sales would have been like without the kickbacks? Less, presumably? But 0? Probably not.
If found guilty, you can be banned from doing any business with Medicare and Medicaid in the US - that’s already a part of the law and it’s the same as losing 50% of your revenue in perpetuity.
But it’s never used. Well, they used it on Pfizer, but the agreement was the ban was for a shell company they owned that didn’t actually sell any drugs. A sacrificial lamb if you will.
“A Pfizer subsidiary, Pharmacia and Upjohn Inc., which was acquired in 2003, has agreed to plead guilty to one count of felony misbranding.”
https://www.dispatch.com/story/news/2009/09/03/pfizer-must-p...