{"id":47286,"date":"2014-06-14T00:00:01","date_gmt":"2014-06-14T04:00:01","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/?p=47286"},"modified":"2014-06-14T00:44:07","modified_gmt":"2014-06-14T04:44:07","slug":"thoughts-3","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/index.php\/2014\/06\/14\/thoughts-3\/","title":{"rendered":"thoughts?…"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Yeah, I’m still stuck on the things that lead up to the EMA U Turn, a house that PHARMA built like so many others. I tried sitting down this afternoon and pretending I’m an AbbVie executive, and then detached from that identification and looked at what I was worried about during my moments as a pretend PHARMA mogul. Neal Ryan was very clear about his company’s worry [see a deal-breaker?…<\/a>] – that some "Pakistani" would figure out how they make Humira [a monoclonal antibody that attacks Tumor Necrosis Factor] and begin brewing up cheap batches in the Himalayas. The racism in that comment aside, the point is well taken [they’re pretty stingy with the formula for Coca Cola too]. That is a legitimate concern for a company, the true meaning of trade secrets.<\/p>\n

The obvious other side of that argument is the PHARMA giants like GSK who hide behind that trade secret argument, using it to keep their Clinical Trial data secret because in the light of day, the blockbuster becomes a maybe not-so-safe weak sister or near inert. We have no dog in corporate wars to hold on to trade secrets, but our duty is to know about the clinical effects of medications. I don’t mind their keeping those manufacturing secrets to themselves, but we all mind their keeping true efficacy and adverse effects under wraps. In fact, in looking at the EMA changes, in their Press Release<\/a>, the EMA said:<\/div>\n