American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: DuckTapeSunroof who wrote (36574)	8/27/2009 3:13:29 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) of 71588

We let 'me-too' patents of dubious scientific validity be issued all the time... for such froo-frah as changing the color of the capsule, or changing one of the inert 'filler' ingredients that go into the pill. I don't think the color example is real, and I'm not so sure about the filler example either. I do know that in one case where the important part of the active ingredient was isolated to a greater extent, and the part that wasn't so important was tossed there was a new patent, perhaps you consider that dubious. Whether or not that last example really is, if it is just a matter of changing color, than the patents in such cases would have almost no impact. The old drug would still go off patent and could still be sold as a generic at lower prices. The "new drug" wouldn't have much of a market. With examples like the one I used (loratadine/Claritin and the new patent for desloratadine/Clarinex), there is some market, but its probably mostly from those who get very good coverage for prescription drugs, but don't get coverage for OTC drugs, otherwise I think most would buy loradtadine for less.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next