DailyFinance.comhttp://www.dailyfinance.comDailyFinance.comhttp://o.aolcdn.com/os/df/2013/img/2-dailyfinance_logo_m.pngDailyFinance.comhttp://www.dailyfinance.comen-usCopyright 2013 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only.Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/Israelis Protest the High Cost of Living - And Prevailhttp://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/09/01/israelis-protest-the-high-cost-of-living-and-prevail/http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/09/01/israelis-protest-the-high-cost-of-living-and-prevail/http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/09/01/israelis-protest-the-high-cost-of-living-and-prevail/#commentsFiled under: ,

As the world watches the uprising in the Arab world, another popular revolt, albeit of a different nature, is taking place in Israel.

What's got Israelis in an uproar? The same thing that raises the ire of many average American citizens: the high cost of living. Israelis want affordable housing, food, gas, goods, and services. Or, as they put it, social justice.

Blame the Cottage Cheese

It all started back in June, when Israelis joined forces on Facebook to lower the price of cottage cheese. Israelis love their cottage cheese. Consumers boycotted the product for a few weeks. Eventually, the boycott worked and the dairies dropped the prices of cottage cheese and other products.

As it turns out, cottage cheese was but a symptom of a much larger problem, and just the beginning of huge expression of popular dissent over the regulation issues that have led to prohibitively high costs in the country.

During the next month, many students and young middle-class Israelis protested high rents and housing prices by moving into tent camps they raised in many of Israel's major cities, including Tel-Aviv and Jerusalem. They also organized several large peaceful demonstrations.

Other than affordable housing, they want the government to change the system in which a few tycoons and families have a stranglehold over the Israeli market. They want to see more competition and regulation.

Tycoons in Control

The Israeli market has one of the tightest concentrations of corporate and economic power in the Western world. Ten families control 160 Israeli public companies, the Bank of Israel found. About 16 tycoons, families, and conglomerates control half the market, often through a pyramid structure, according to Israeli parliament findings.

These controlling families have their tentacles in everything from financial services to media to bread. It's a thinly veiled oligopoly. As a result, Israelis pay much more for goods and services than other developed nations and have one of the largest gaps between rich and poor among industrialized countries.

The cottage cheese issue is a good example of how this concentration of power hurts the people.

There are just three dairies that control the market, and they've been hiking prices for a while, enjoying the protection of the high tariffs imposed on imported dairy products. In fact, those same dairies also export their products to Europe and the U.S. But foreign customers pay 50% less than Israelis pay for the cottage cheese made in their own backyard, which is more than odd considering the cost of transportation.

Lowering Prices One Boycott at a Time

Seeing as the government isn't doing enough to protect the market from oligopolies, the consumers took it upon themselves. On the hot seat after cottage cheese was Israel's largest supermarket chain, Nochi Dankner's Shufersal (or Super-Sol), whose market share of bar-coded foodstuffs is a staggering 37%.

Sponsored Links
The demonstrators demanded a substantial reduction in prices at the chain. About half the public said they would join in the boycott if it went ahead. Shufersal's management negotiated with the protesters and has agreed to a 20% cut on 30 leading food products, including bread, milk, eggs, and baby formula, for at least a year. Another large supermarket chain, Mega, controlled by Blue Square (BSI), immediately followed suit.

Now the protesters are organizing a million-person march for Saturday -- no small feat for Israel's population of roughly 7 million. After that, they will begin the so-called 10 plagues initiative, which will target one controlling family/tycoon at a time. The first target is Yitzhak Tshuva and his Delek (DK) gas stations.

Does Social Protest Work?

Last month, Prime Minister Netanyahu promised he would look into oligopolies in the market. But with many of the interested parties also holding positions in the government and the Israeli parliament, and with strong lobbies by many of the groups, reforms won't be easy to come by.

While the American public doesn't have the same concerns as Israelis do, they have others. It's interesting to contemplate what would happen if the U.S. took a cue from the peaceful consumer revolt in Israel. The march of the unemployed, for example, could see millions upon millions in the streets, demanding jobs.

Motley Fool contributor Melly Alazraki does not own any shares in the companies mentioned.


Permalink | Email this | Comments

]]>blue squareBlueSquarecost of livingCostOfLivingdelekhigh rentsHighRentsIsrael protestsIsraelProtestsMega supermarketsMegaSupermarketsNochi DanknerNochiDanknerpeaceful protestPeacefulProtestSuper-SolYitzhak TshuvaYitzhakTshuvaMelly AlazrakiThu, 01 Sep 2011 16:00:00 ESTShockingly Few Pharma Ads Comply With FDA Guidelineshttp://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/08/25/shockingly-few-pharma-ads-comply-with-fda-guidelines/http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/08/25/shockingly-few-pharma-ads-comply-with-fda-guidelines/http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/08/25/shockingly-few-pharma-ads-comply-with-fda-guidelines/#commentsFiled under: ,

Advertising is all about presenting a product in the most flattering light possible. Still, there are limits to what marketers can and cannot say, particularly when it comes to hawking items that directly affect consumers' physical well-being, such as pharmaceuticals.

That's what makes the results of a new study led by Mount Sinai School of Medicine particularly shocking: It found that a measly 18% of pharmaceutical ads comply with FDA guidelines.

The study, published last week in the journal Public Library of Science One, looked at physician-directed ads in medical journals during November 2008. The drugs in the ads included quite a few high-risk ones, including cancer meds.

P.S.: May Cause Death

Of the ads the researchers looked at, over half (58%) failed to quantify serious risks including death, and only 52% had appropriate references so that doctors could go and check the data and the studies themselves. But there were many other offenses according to the study. For example:

  • Novo Nordisk's (NVO) ad for NovoLog, a fast-acting insulin for diabetics, claimed a certain efficacy statistic on the front page. But in the references listed in the third page of the ad, the actual data was misrepresented.
  • Neither Pfizer's (PFE) ad for the world's best-selling drug, cholesterol fighter Lipitor, nor AstraZeneca's (AZN) ad for Crestor had references to support the drugs' efficacy claims.
  • Eli Lilly's (LLY) ad for Alimta, a drug for a certain type of advanced lung cancer, showed an apparently healthy person windsurfing. The image clearly misrepresents the patients who should receive the drug.

It's important to note that no company stood out as a particular offender, according to Dr. Deborah Korenstein, lead author of the study and Associate Professor of Medicine at Mount Sinai School of Medicine.

Is Your Doctor Influenced by Slick Ads?

Journal advertising is the most profitable form of drug marketing, with a $5 return for every $1 spent, according to previous research. That's a great return for the companies that advertise, but at what cost to the public health?

Sponsored Links
Since physicians are actually the ones prescribing the drugs, the fact that so few ads adhere to the guidelines -- and barely even convey basic information necessary for safe prescribing -- is disturbing. Even if they deny it, doctors' prescribing practices are influenced by these ads, Korenstein said via an email interview.

Previous studies have shown that exposure to such ads was associated with less-effective, lower-quality prescribing decisions. "For that reason," Korenstein says, "it seems important that ads contain the relevant information for safe prescribing."

It's officially the FDA's responsibility to make sure pharmaceutical ads adhere to guidelines. However, its $9 million annual budget for compliance pales in comparison to the industry's $58 billion annual marketing spending.

As long as there's money to be made from ads, companies will continue to push the limits of aggressive marketing. That leaves the responsibility for seeing through the flashy ads resting squarely on the shoulders of physicians. Let's just hope that they're not too swayed by slick marketing copy.

Keep tabs on the pharmaceutical companies mentioned in this article by creating a free Fool watchlist.

Motley Fool contributor Melly Alazraki does not own any shares in the companies listed. Motley Fool newsletter services have recommended buying shares of Pfizer.



Permalink | Email this | Comments

]]>Astrazenecabig pharmaBigPharmadrug adsdrug companiesdrug marketingDrugAdsDrugCompaniesDrugMarketingEli Lillyfda guidelinesFdaGuidelinesmedicinePfizerpharmaceutical adspharmaceutical advertisingpharmaceutical industryPharmaceuticalAdsPharmaceuticalAdvertisingPharmaceuticalIndustrypharmaceuticalsMelly AlazrakiThu, 25 Aug 2011 13:30:00 ESTThe Dark Cloud Over Growing Antidepressant Prescriptionshttp://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/08/10/the-dark-cloud-over-growing-antidepressant-prescriptions/http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/08/10/the-dark-cloud-over-growing-antidepressant-prescriptions/http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/08/10/the-dark-cloud-over-growing-antidepressant-prescriptions/#commentsFiled under: , ,

Does the market have you thinking about getting a little pharmacological help to ease your jitters and lift your mood? Getting a prescription for Prozac is easier than you think. In fact, you can skip the appointment with a psychiatrist altogether.

A study released last week in Health Affairs journal found a growing trend of doctors who aren't psychiatrists offering antidepressants to patients. The meds often get prescribed without any psychiatric diagnosis, simply to boost someone's mood, relieve mild anxiety, or improve sleep. Worse yet, there's no evidence these drugs actually help such patients.

All these questionable prescriptions helped make this class of drugs one of the most commonly prescribed in the U.S. In 2010, according to IMS Health data, antidepressants spending grew to $11.6 billion. The class was the second most prescribed after cholesterol regulators and heart meds, with nearly 254 million prescriptions.

It's No Secret Who's Really Smiling

The growth in antidepressant use brings a smile to at least one group of people: Big Pharma.

Sponsored Links


While Eli Lilly's (LLY) Prozac has long lost its patent protection, U.S. Cymbalta sales for 2010 grew 9% to $2.8 billion, topping the $758 million mark in the most recent second quarter. Bristol-Myers Squibb's (BMY) Abilify U.S. sales grew by 5% in the recent quarter, to 517 million. AstraZeneca's (AZN) second-quarter U.S. sales of Seroquel XR grew 14% to $205 million. (Both Seroquel XR and Abilify are atypical antipsychotics approved by the FDA as adjunct treatments for depression that doesn't respond to a selective serotonin re-uptake inhibitor like Prozac or Zoloft alone.)

The study made no mention of any illegal marketing practices by pharmaceuticals that may have contributed to this trend, although such allegations regarding off-label marketing are certainly not foreign to AstraZeneca or Eli Lilly, among many others.

However, the study said that direct-to-consumer advertising could be causing patients to request the drugs. The U.S. and New Zealand are the only countries that allow advertising for prescription medications.

Do We Have a Drug Problem?

The researchers are concerned that this growing trend of non-psychiatrists prescribing antidepressants could mean that the drugs get prescribed inappropriately. They worry that patients who haven't been properly diagnosed are not receiving the best care they need. The study suggests starting by educating physicians on mental disorders, the drugs, and their appropriate use.

The researchers also encourage patients to ask questions -- lots of them, including questions about the diagnoses, the side effects, possible alternative treatments, and whether antidepressants are the right treatment for their problems in the first place.

Motley Fool contributor Melly Alazraki does not own shares in any of the companies mentioned.


Permalink | Email this | Comments

]]>Abilifyantidepressant side effectsantidepressantsAntidepressantSideEffectsAstrazenecaastrazeneca+seroquelastrazenecasettlementseroquelBristol-Myers SquibbEli LillyEliLillyoff label marketingOffLabelMarketingprescription drugsPrescriptionDrugsseroquelsettlementsseroquelsideeffectsSSRI adverse effectsSsriAdverseEffectsSSRIsMelly AlazrakiWed, 10 Aug 2011 16:00:00 ESTDendreon's Infectious Influence on Biotechshttp://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/08/05/dendreons-infectious-influence-on-biotechs/http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/08/05/dendreons-infectious-influence-on-biotechs/http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/08/05/dendreons-infectious-influence-on-biotechs/#commentsFiled under: , , , ,

Thursday was an ugly day on Wall Street, and one of the hardest-hit stocks was biotech Dendreon (DNDN), which plunged a heart-stopping 67%.

The maker of the prostate cancer vaccine Provenge reported disappointing results and withdrew its sales forecast. Management's reasoning left huge question marks about its product -- questions that spooked investors and added additional selling pressure on other biotechs.

  • Human Genome (HGSI), which recently launched its lupus drug, Benlysta, dropped nearly 15% Thursday.
  • InterMune (ITMN) lost 19% of its value after an analyst from Jefferies spelled it out after downgrading the stock to underperform. The analyst fears that expectations for InterMune's lung drug, which is about to launch in Europe, are unreasonable and would trigger a Dendreon-like disaster.
  • Savient (SVNT) -- which also launched its gout drug, Krystexxa, at the end of last year -- also got hit hard, sinking 28%. Investors weren't impressed with the second quarter, even more than the first.
  • Seattle Genetics (SGEN) also skidded more than 9%, even though an FDA panel recently recommended accelerated approval of Adcetris.

And let's not forget Vertex (VRTX) and its very promising Hep C drug that was recently approved; its stock was down 8%. Can this possibly be a flop, too? Suddenly, investors who used to be cautious about early development drugs and stock are now also cautious about companies with launched drugs.

Sponsored Links

The biotech sector as a whole got clobbered. Companies big and small, with products in different stages of development, approval, or launch declined magnificently. Of course, not all companies were down simply because of Dendreon, but it's hard not to see how the sector contracted some of Dendreon's disease.

We are seeing some slight recovery today in individual companies. However, the Nasdaq Biotechnology index , which was down about 8% Thursday, declined further Friday. That said, I wouldn't recommend going on a shopping spree for any discounted biotech. However, if you've been watching one or two companies, the recent market activity has likely made for good bargain hunting.

Motley Fool contributor Melly Alazraki does not own shares in any of the companies mentioned. Motley Fool newsletter services have recommended buying shares of Vertex Pharmaceuticals.


Permalink | Email this | Comments

]]>biotech stocksBiotechStocksDendreonDendreon share priceDendreon stock priceDendreonSharePriceDendreonStockPriceHuman GenomeHumanGenomeintermuneNASDAQ Biotechnology IndexNasdaqBiotechnologyIndexsavientSavientPharmaceuticalsseattle geneticsSeattleGeneticsvertexMelly AlazrakiFri, 05 Aug 2011 17:45:00 ESTPfizer Sells Capsugel: Will More Asset Sales Follow?http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/04/04/pfizer-sells-capsugel-will-more-asset-sales-follow/http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/04/04/pfizer-sells-capsugel-will-more-asset-sales-follow/http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/04/04/pfizer-sells-capsugel-will-more-asset-sales-follow/#commentsFiled under: , ,

Pfizer Sells Capsugel: Will More Asset Sales Follow?Pfizer (PFE) on Monday began executing what could be the start of two years of asset sales: The New York-based drugmaker said it agreed to sell its Capsugel business for $2.375 billion in cash to private-equity firm Kohlberg Kravis Roberts.

Later this year, the world's biggest pharmaceutical company will lose patent protection on the world's best-selling drug: cholesterol fighter Lipitor. In 2010, with $10.8 billion in sales, Lipitor accounted for 15.8% of Pfizer's total revenue. Between 2010 and 2012, drugs that account for 42% of Pfizer's pharmaceutical revenue will lose patent protection.

Of course, Pfizer has known about its looming patent cliff for years. As it found itself unable to compensate for its certain decline in sales with new products from its pipeline of drugs, it began acquiring other companies in search of growth possibilities. This policy led to the $68 billion mega-merger with Wyeth in 2009 and smaller acquisitions later.

But it seems that the consolidation trend has failed to deliver, and Pfizer itself may have become too big. The promised margin improvements from economies of scale didn't materialize, and instead the mergers created a bloated organization, critics said.

Bigger is not better, a Goldman Sachs (GS) analyst Jami Rubin noted in February, as reported by Barron's, suggesting that Pfizer and other pharmas could benefit from spinning off non-core businesses.

Dismantling the Business

Such a 180-degree turn could certainly explain the sudden resignation in December of former CEO Jeff Kindler, who led the Wyeth acquisition. Especially when soon afterward, new CEO Ian Read indicated the acquisition trend would reverse, following months of hints about asset sales.

Sponsored Links
In March, Sanford C. Bernstein analyst Tim Anderson met with Read. In a note to clients, he wrote that the drugmaker may spin off various businesses, including its consumer-health and generic-drug units. The deals, Anderson said, could result in a 40% contraction in Pfizer's revenue base to between $35 billion and $40 billion from $67 billion. Read and the board believe that "dismantling the business" will "break the cycle of underperformance," as the Dow Jones Newswire quoted. R&D chief Mikael Dolsten also outlined the divestiture strategy at a Barclays Capital (BCS) investor conference.

On top of Capsugel, whose revenue in 2010 amounted to $750 million, Anderson thinks Pfizer could spin off its other diversified business units: animal health, consumer health, nutritionals, as well as its pharma unit of established products (which includes generics). And while Capsugel was sold outright, the rest of the deals would likely be spinoffs to Pfizer shareholders.

Here are the units' revenues in 2010:
  • Established Products: $10.1 billion
  • Animal Health: $3.6 billion
  • Consumer Health: $2.8 billion
  • Nutrition: $1.9 billion
If all these deals go though in the next two years, Pfizer would have four pharmaceutical units remaining: primary care, specialty care, oncology and emerging markets.

For now, it seems investors approve of the Capsugel sale: Pfizer shares are up 0.7%. Still, not everybody's ecstatic about this new trend. One obvious reason is the lost revenue. But mostly, many question whether Pfizer has what it takes to be an innovative core pharmaceutical company -- it sure hasn't had the best track record recently. And Read's recently announced plans to shrink the research & development budget and pipeline certainly don't promote confidence in Pfizer's future.



Permalink | Email this | Comments

]]>capsugelgeneric drugsKKRKohlberg Kravis RobertsLipitormergers and acquisitionspatent cliffpfizPfizerpharma stockspharmaceutical stockspharmaceuticalsRDresearch and developmentspinoffsWyethMelly AlazrakiMon, 04 Apr 2011 14:15:00 ESTThe Business World's Best April Fools Day Prankshttp://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/04/01/best-corporate-april-fools-day-pranks/http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/04/01/best-corporate-april-fools-day-pranks/http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/04/01/best-corporate-april-fools-day-pranks/#commentsFiled under: , , , ,

It's April Fools Day! Celebrated around the world, it's the perfect time for people to play practical jokes and pranks on each other. But the holiday isn't just a time for individuals to have a laugh on their friends and family: Large companies have long had a tradition of using April 1 to pull humorous hoaxes on the public. Here are some of my favorites from past years.

Google (GOOG) is probably the most well known company for its April Fools Day pranks. Remember back in 2000, when they launched the Google MentalPlex -- a way to operate the search engine by thought control? Or Google Romance launched on April 1, 2006. And last year, Google switched names with Topeka.

But by far, my favorite was the Google Animal Translator, an Android app launched from the company's pet-friendly U.K. offices last year. A YouTube video explains how the new app "translates animal speech into human vernacular" by analyzing the "neurobiological acoustics" of the animal's speech. Makes sense, no?

Starbucks (SBUX) also loves to play tricks on its customers. You asked for more drink sizes, the coffee giant said last year. We listened to our customers and delivered. Yes, Starbucks announced two new sizes: Plenta -- a gigantic, 128-ounce drink, and Micra -- a tiny, 2-ounce sip.

The company added pictures of people holding the drinks, and even proceeded to calm the environmentally conscious by saying the mammoth Plenta cups could be reused in several ways, such as rain hats, lampshades or yoga blocks. The Micra cup, it said, could serve "as a convenient milk dish for kittens, soft boiled egg cup or paper clip holder."

Then there's this classic from 1983: Burger King's famous Left-Handed Whopper. The left-handed burger, the fast-food burger chain said, will still include all the ingredients, "but the sandwich has been re-designed to fit more comfortably in the left hand." How? "The new Left-Handed Whopper will have all the condiments rotated 180 degrees, thereby redistributing the weight of the sandwich so that the bulk of them skew to the left." Of course, "This will result in fewer condiment 'spills' for left-handed hamburger lovers."

Another of my favorites belongs to the Guardian newspaper in England, which in 2009 announced it would switch from paper to Twitter. "Consolidating its position at the cutting edge of new media technology, the Guardian today announces that it will become the first newspaper in the world to be published exclusively via Twitter."

As for the 140 character limit: "Skeptics have expressed concerns that 140 characters may be insufficient to capture the full breadth of meaningful human activity, but social media experts say the spread of Twitter encourages brevity, and that it ought to be possible to convey the gist of any message in a tweet."

Finally, Internet travel company Expedia (EXPE) on April 1, 2009 offered flights to Mars. The site, which featured an ad for the flights, includes details on hotels and activities on Mars as well as explanation about life and weather on Mars. You can even choose your spaceship.

Permalink | Email this | Comments

]]>animal translatorApril Fools Dayburger kingcoffee cupsColumnsExpediagooglehoaxjokeleft-handed whoppermentalplexmicraplentaprankthe guardiantravel to marstwitterMelly AlazrakiFri, 01 Apr 2011 12:30:00 ESTThe Five Best Performing Biotech Stocks of 2011 -- So Farhttp://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/04/01/five-best-performing-biotech-stocks-of-2011/http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/04/01/five-best-performing-biotech-stocks-of-2011/http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/04/01/five-best-performing-biotech-stocks-of-2011/#commentsFiled under: , , ,

Five Best Performing Biotech Stocks of 2011 The first quarter of 2011 has been kind to several biotechnology stocks. As pharmaceutical companies' patent cliff problems shifted into higher gear this year, biotechs often seemed a much more promising bet: Their biologic drugs command high prices, tend become blockbusters, and -- perhaps most important -- are in far less danger from generic competition.

So which companies were investors' favorites this quarter? Based on the data from Standard & Poor's Capital IQ division, these stocks have been the big biotech winners so far this year.

1. Vertex Pharmaceuticals (VRTX) topped the list with a 38.4% return as of Wednesday's close of $48.48. This $9.8 billion market cap non-profitable company is all promise. It is its pipeline that's drawing investors, especially the hepatitis C treatment telaprevir and potential cystic fibrosis drug VX-770.

Both diseases present large market opportunities: Liver disease caused by the hepatitis C virus affects 3.2 million individuals in the U.S. and as many as 100 million people worldwide. Cystic fibrosis is an inherited genetic disease that affects about 30,000 people in the U.S. and has few treatment options.

Analysts have favored the stock, with a consensus buy recommendation. However, just on Thursday, Vertex announced two more telaprevir study results that did not impress investors and the stock declined 2% to $47.50. Also, Vertex is not without competitors and is in a race with Merck (MRK) and its experimental Hep C drug boceprevir to be the first to reach the market.

The stock's 52-week high of $52.13 was set on March 7, up from a low of $31.25 set on July 1, 2010.

2. Regeneron Pharmaceuticals (REGN) also had an impressive quarter, soaring 36.1% to $44.68 as of Wednesday's close, after setting an intra-day 52-week high of $45.11. This $3.88 billion market cap biopharmaceutical company has been on a tear with a yearly return of 67% as it continued to develop cancer, eye-condition and gout treatments.

In fact, Regeneron, which sells only one product -- Arcalyst (rilonacept), for the treatment of a rare, inherited, inflammatory condition -- last month submitted an application to the Food and Drug Administration for its VEGF Trap-Eye for the treatment of the eye disorder that is the leading cause of blindness in patients older than 65 in the U.S. and Europe. If the treatment is approved, Regeneron hopes to take market share from Roche/Novartis's (NVS) Lucentis.

However, Regeneron's pipeline also suffered a setback recently. Aflibercept, its candidate drug for non-small-cell lung cancer -- a notoriously difficult-to-treat disease -- failed to increase overall survival time in a late-stage study. For now, analysts favor the stock with a consensus buy recommendation, but this setback follows others, making ongoing studies of aflibercept vital for Regeneron's future. The company co-developed aflibercept with Sanofi-Aventis (SNY).

3. Cephalon (CEPH) was, until Tuesday's close, the third-worst biotech performer in the S&P 1500, with a -4.8% return year-to-date, according to Capital IQ. All that changed late Tuesday, when Canadian company Valeant Pharmaceuticals (VRX) launched a hostile takeover of the company at $73 a share, valuing the company at $5.7 billion. Shares soared 28% and closed on Wednesday at $75.44 -- above the offer price -- to register a healthy 22.23% return year-to-date and boost its market cap to $5.72 billion.

Cephalon itself has actually been on a shopping spree. Just the day before Valeant's announcement, Cephalon said it was buying Australian oncology specialist ChemGenex Pharmaceuticals, and a week earlier, it announced the acquisition of private Canadian oncology specialist Gemin X Pharmaceuticals. Cephalon has been trying to address the pending loss of patent protection in 2012 for its blockbuster narcolepsy pill, Provigil, a lackluster pipeline, and the death of its founder and long-time CEO in December.

In general, analysts, who rate Cephalon a hold, believe Valeant's offer will not meet with much resistance, and that Cephalon, which lost 19% of its value in the prior 12 months, should accept the offer.

4. Gilead Sciences (GILD), the world's largest maker of HIV/AIDS drugs, closed Wednesday at $42.51, allowing this nearly $34 billion market cap biotech to record a return of 17.3% year-to-date. Gilead is slowly climbing back toward the 52-week high of $46.62 it set in April of last year, making its one-year return an unimpressive -6%. Analysts overall rate Gilead as a buy.

When Gilead reported its fourth-quarter profit dropped 22%, it also said the FDA hadn't accepted its market application for a new application of its blockbuster HIV treatment Truvada, a setback for the company's HIV drug franchise's growth prospects. For now, its HIV medicines are under patent protection, but they are already facing challenges, such as from generic 3TC, even as it continues its research in the field. Gilead has also been acquiring smaller companies to enhance its pipeline, and Thursday announced a cancer research collaboration with Yale University.

5. Cubist Pharmaceuticals (CBST) rounds out the top five best biotech performers in the S&P 1500, according to Capital IQ, with a 16.3% return year-to-date. The smaller company ($1.48 billion market cap) relies on its anti-bacterial drug Cubicin, used in hospitals for difficult-to-treat infections, including MRSA, for most of its revenue.

While the company's pipeline consists of other antibiotic potentials to address this unmet need area of severe infections, its revenue source is in jeopardy: Generic drugmaker Teva Phamaceutical (TEVA) is trying to enter the market.


Permalink | Email this | Comments

]]>3TCafliberceptArcalystbiotechbiotech stocksbiotechnologyCephalonCubicinCubist Pharmaceuticalscystic fibrosiscystic fibrosis treatmentdrugsgeneric drugsGilead Scienceshepatitis ChivHIV AIDSHIV AIDS drugspatent cliffpatentsProvigilRegeneronrilonaceptStocks to buytelaprevirValeantvertexVX-770Melly AlazrakiFri, 01 Apr 2011 07:30:00 ESTWalgreen Buys Drugstore.com for Twice Its Market Valuehttp://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/03/24/walgreen-buys-drugstore-com-for-twice-its-market-value/http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/03/24/walgreen-buys-drugstore-com-for-twice-its-market-value/http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/03/24/walgreen-buys-drugstore-com-for-twice-its-market-value/#commentsFiled under: , , , , ,

Walgreen Buys Drugstore.com for Twice Its Market Value Still recovering from the punishment investors dished after it reported quarterly results two days ago, Walgreen (WAG) announced Thursday it is buying online retailer drugstore.com (DSCM) for an enterprise value of about $409 million, and an equity value of approximately $429 million, or $3.80 per share -- a 113% premium over the company's Wednesday's close.

"Our acquisition of drugstore.com today significantly accelerates our online strategy," said Walgreen President and CEO Greg Wasson. "This acquisition offers a unique opportunity that will provide us immediate access to more than 3 million savvy, online loyal customers, and will allow us to move even closer to our existing customers through relationships with new vendors and partners, adding approximately 60,000 products to our already strong online offering."

Other sites operated by drugstore.com that Walgreen is getting in the deal include Beauty.com, SkinStore.com and VisionDirect.com. Drugstore.com, which will maintain separate branding of its websites after the transaction closes, had more than $456 million in sales in 2010, and ranked as the eighth-largest e-tailer in the U.S. according to Internet Retailer magazine. Walgreen had $67 billion in sales.

Walgreen anticipates the transaction to be dilutive to fourth quarter 2011 earnings by approximately 3 cents per share due to transaction-related one-time costs, and will continue to be dilutive to earnings by 3 to 4 cents per share in fiscal 2012, and 1 to 2 cents per share in fiscal 2013.

As part of its retail focus, earlier this month, Walgreen announced that it was selling its pharmacy benefit management business to Catalyst Health Solutions (CHSI) for $525 million. The news was met with relief from investors, who pushed shares higher. Pharmacy benefit managers are third-party administrators of prescription drug claims. And, just over a year ago, it bought the New York drugstore chain Duane Reade and its 258 stores for nearly $1.1 billion.

Giving Walgreen a Competitive Edge

While Walgreen's profit climbed 10% in the last quarter and its same-store sales have been rising in recent months, the retailer said it expects pressure on earnings from government agencies' cutbacks. Walgreen operates nearly 7,700 retail pharmacies, and this latest acquisition builds on that renewed retail focus and its attempt to boost its online presence.

Sponsored Links
"Walgreens has been focusing on organic growth for years, but hit a wall with this strategy and realized they had to do it via acquisition," Toon Van Beeck, senior analyst with IBISWorld told DailyFinance. "The acquisition of drugstore.com is in line with its focus on its core business, and gives Walgreen a competitive edge against CVS (CVS) and Rite Aid (RAD)."

"The online medication and cosmetic market is valued at $7 billion," Van Beeck added. "Walgreen wanted to hit the online and mobile market, so this is a fantastic opportunity. They can build a very profitable business in a growing market."

Walgreen indeed has also been offering a smartphone application that includes flu shot and store locators, and Express Refills by Scan, which allows consumers order refills instantly by scanning the bar codes on their prescription bottles.

"Some will have questions about the price -- a 110% premium," Van Beeck said. "While this is out of line with previous such deals, it's a small acquisition, which Walgreen can pay with cash. Walgreen will be able to leverage the online store and come back with online market sales and compete with the likes of Amazon.com (AMZN), Walmart (WMT) and Procter and Gamble (PG)."

Shares of drugstore.com today climbed 110%, while Walgreen shares enjoyed a 1% push.

Permalink | Email this | Comments

]]>amazoncvsdrug storesDrugstore.comduane readee-tailersExpress Refillsmergers and acquisitionsonline shoppingpharmacyProcter & Gambleprocter and gamblerite aidWalgreenwalmartMelly AlazrakiThu, 24 Mar 2011 15:20:00 ESTRadiation Risk to U.S. from Japanese Reactors Very Low, Top Expert Explainshttp://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/03/23/radiation-risk-us-japan-nuclear-reactors-low-expert/http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/03/23/radiation-risk-us-japan-nuclear-reactors-low-expert/http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/03/23/radiation-risk-us-japan-nuclear-reactors-low-expert/#commentsFiled under:

Fukushima The situation with the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant has frayed more than a few nerves around the world, especially after food, water and seawater in Japan were found to be contaminated with radiation from the damaged reactors. But an environmental science expert at Harvard School of Public Health, Dr. Edward Maher, tells DailyFinance that the risks to Americans are very low.

Maher explains that while "significantly elevated levels of airborne radiation can increase the cancer risk for all cancers, the risk is a function of the airborne concentration, exposure time and the specific radionuclides involved."

DailyFinance asked Dr. Maher the questions we know you want answers to.

Is there a risk to U.S. residents from air and seawater contamination?

"No," says Maher, "these risks are mitigated by ... the great distance away the U.S. is from the accident site. After being dispersed and diluted by 6,000 miles of atmosphere and the mighty Pacific Ocean, respectively, neither airborne or seawater concentrations will be a threat to the U.S. mainland." The concentrations in the air and water by the time they reach the West Coast "will be indistinguishable from background radiation and will have no health impact to our citizens," he says.

What are the risks of radiation-contaminated seawater, water and food?

While ingesting radioactive food can cause DNA and cell damage, and possibly increase your cancer risk, Maher explains that in fact, we all do just that every day.

"All seawater, soil, water and food contain trace amounts of naturally-occurring background radioactivity [from such innocuous seeming source as rocks, bricks and the sun]. It's unavoidable."

Maher, who is president of the Health Physics Society, also points out that the government regulates just how high a concentration of radioactivity food and water can contain and still be considered safe.

"In accidents like the one in Japan, food supplies can potentially become contaminated above these maximum concentrations, and when this occurs, the government will impound these food supplies and prevent them from entering the market."

What about the risk to the U.S. consumer from imported food?

"[T]he only credible risk is through consumer items brought into this country, i.e., imported food and plants," Maher acknowledges. But, "[t]he Japanese government has similar regulations and practices to the U.S. on controlling foodstuffs following a radiological or nuclear contamination event."

Indeed, the Japanese Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare has already ordered a halt to the sale of certain food products from some affected prefectures.

"This will prevent contaminated foodstuffs from entering the Japanese and world markets," Maher says. "Our government will check it again as it enters the U.S."

Indeed, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration was quick to say that there is no risk to America's food supply. It banned some food imports from affected regions in Japan, and has augmented its radiation screening, among other precautionary measures. Foods from Japan, the FDA noted, make up less than 4% of all foods imported to the U.S.

Have higher-than-normal radiation levels been observed in the air, seawater, food in the U.S.?

"Finding naturally-occurring radionuclides in foodstuffs is nothing new. It happens all the time," says Maher. "I haven't seen any reports of slight elevations of the Japanese plant radionuclides in this country."

While the Environmental Protection Agency's detectors on the West Coast have captured trace amounts of radioactive elements consistent with those released by Japan's nuclear incident, the radiation levels detected on the filters from California and Washington monitors are "hundreds of thousands to millions of times below levels of concern."

"It wouldn't be surprising if trace amounts of plant radionuclides are detected in the U.S. at some point," says Maher, "but none of them will have any consequence to the U.S. population." Thanks to the sensitivity of our modern, high-tech instrumentation, detectors can register the slightest elevation of radiation, down to the single atom level. "But that doesn't mean it has health significance. In the vast number of cases, it means nothing. It's still the 'dose that makes the poison.' "

What should U.S. consumers do to protect themselves?

Consumers in America and Japan should know that their governments have been actively protecting their food and water supplies for years against all kinds of contamination: radiological, chemical and biological. "Part of that protection is periodic, mandatory and random sampling of the food and water supplies for these agents by the Food and Drug Administration or U.S. Environmental Protection Agency," Maher reassures us.

"These activities go on in the background even in the absence of a credible threat or a known accident. In an accident or event situation, these agencies will step up their [monitoring activities]. The U.S. consumer doesn't need to do any more than what the government is already doing on their behalf."

Permalink | Email this | Comments

]]>aircancerEdward Maherenvironmental protection agencyEPAFDAfoodfood and drug administrationHealth Physics SocietyImportsJapanjapan earthquakejapan nuclear crisisJapan nuclear plantsradiationradiation exposure risksradioactiveradioactivitywaterMelly AlazrakiWed, 23 Mar 2011 17:00:00 ESTA Bad Job Can Be Worse for Your Mental Health Than No Job at All, Study Showshttp://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/03/21/bad-job-worse-mental-health-unemployment/http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/03/21/bad-job-worse-mental-health-unemployment/http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/03/21/bad-job-worse-mental-health-unemployment/#commentsFiled under: , , , , ,

A Bad Job Can Be Worse Than No Job At All, Say Psychologists We're all aware of the painful psychological impact unemployment can have on a person. Diminished self esteem, anxiety, depression and lack of sleep are among the mental symptoms that can also affect physical health, as researchers at Washington and Lee University reported in 2008. In a 2009 study, The Anguish of Unemployment, Rutgers University researchers even quantified the psychological trauma of job loss.

But a new study reveals something that may surprise some victims of this recession: A bad job can be as harmful to your mental health as no job at all, and in fact, it can be even worse.

"Because employment is associated with better mental health than unemployment, policy has focused on the risk posed by joblessness, although there is evidence that poor quality jobs can erode mental health," wrote the authors of the study published last week online in the journal Occupational and Environmental Medicine.

The Worse the Job, the Steeper the Decline

The researchers who conducted the Australian study based their findings on data from more than 7,000 people of working age. The respondents were asked about their employment status, and were assessed using the mental health inventory -- a measure of general psychological distress and well-being, both positive and negative.

For those who were employed, the researchers also assessed the quality of their jobs using four factors: demands and complexity of the job; level of control; perceived job security; and whether or not employees thought they were paid fairly for the work they did.

As expected, the authors noted, the unemployed had poorer mental health overall than the employed. But the study also showed that the mental health of the unemployed was comparable or even superior to the mental health of those in poor-quality jobs. In fact, those in the worst jobs experienced the sharpest declines in mental health over time.

As the number of unfavorable working conditions increased, the more the mental health scores declined. The relationship was strong enough that job quality actually predicted subsequent mental health.

The researchers found that while moving from unemployment into a high-quality job led to improvement in mental health, finding a poor-quality job after a period of unemployment didn't. In fact, "the transition from unemployment to a poor quality job was more detrimental to mental health than remaining unemployed," the authors wrote.

"The results demonstrate the relevance of psychosocial job quality for the design of employment policies. Work-first policies are based on the notion that any job is better than none as work promotes economic as well as personal well being." The authors conclude, "The current results, therefore suggest that employment strategies seeking to promote positive outcomes for unemployed individuals need to also take account of job design and workplace policy."

Permalink | Email this | Comments

]]>anxietybad jobsdepressiongood jobhiringinsomniajobslayoffsLong term unemployedmental healthOccupational and Environmental Medicinepsychologyresearchself esteemsleeplessnessstudyThe Anguish of UnemploymentunemploymentMelly AlazrakiMon, 21 Mar 2011 13:00:00 ESTHow Much Does Your Name Affect Where You Work?http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/03/17/does-your-name-affect-where-you-work/http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/03/17/does-your-name-affect-where-you-work/http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/03/17/does-your-name-affect-where-you-work/#commentsFiled under: , ,

Names define us, but do they determine who we are? In many cultures, names have special meanings and are believed to affect people's personalities and the courses of their lives. The Jewish mystical discipline of Kabbalah, for example, posits that a person's name has a direct relationship with their condition in life -- so much so that changing your name can alter it.

But what does science have to say on the subject? A recent study looked at how our names might affect where we choose to work. The result? Not surprising, the new study found no relationship -- but an earlier study did.

The idea that our names -- particularly the first letters of our names -- can influence our decisions, including whom we marry and where we move is what psychologists call "implicit egotism."

In 2008, two Belgian researchers found that workers in their country were more likely to choose a workplace if the first letter of its name matched their own. But University of Pennsylvania associate professor Uri Simonsohn believes the Belgians got the cause and effect exactly backwards.

What's Really in a Name? Your Family

"Henry Ford, for example, worked for a company starting with F [Ford (F)] not because of an unconscious attraction to that letter, but because he named the company after himself," writes Simonsohn in a commentary to be published in an upcoming issue of Psychological Science, a journal of the Association for Psychological Science.

Sponsored Links
Think of Walt Disney's Disney (DIS) or Sam Walton's Wal-Mart (WMT) to name a couple more. Similarly, many small family owned businesses are exactly so christened, and family members with the same last names work there, sometimes for generations.

Simonsohn revisited the Belgian study with similar U.S. data from records of political donations made during the 2004 campaigns, which include donors' names and employers. When he just compared first initials, he indeed found more than 2.5 times as many people work for an employer with a matching initial as would be expected by chance.

But when he corrected for possible reverse causality -- people working in family businesses -- either by comparing the first three letters or by looking only at larger companies (assuming family businesses tend to be smaller), he found that the number of people who worked for an employer with an initial matching their own was essentially what you would expect to find based on random chance.

Tipping the Balance

Still, Simonsohn doesn't discount implicit egotism altogether. While he told DailyFinance he found no evidence of it in the three decisions he examined -- marriage, moving and work place -- he added it certainly affects some decisions, such as "what [people] name their children," and also those involving choices in which we don't have a strong opinion.

"Say I like things with the letter "U" more than with other letters," Uri Simonsohn explained. The effect "is unlikely to be huge" so for it to tip the balance of choice between two options, they had "better be very similar or hard for me to tease apart."

For example, he said: "I have no clue which wine is better, so I may buy more wines starting with U than you would. But I would not move to another country, have another profession or marry another woman for that reason alone."


Permalink | Email this | Comments

]]>careerchosing a jobColumnscompanyemployeesemployersfamily businessimplicit egotismKabbalahlife choicesname changenamesPsychological ScienceUri SimonsohnMelly AlazrakiThu, 17 Mar 2011 16:00:00 ESTMillions of Americans Lose Their Health Insurance Along With Their Jobshttp://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/03/16/millions-of-americans-lose-their-health-insurance-along-with-the/http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/03/16/millions-of-americans-lose-their-health-insurance-along-with-the/http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/03/16/millions-of-americans-lose-their-health-insurance-along-with-the/#commentsFiled under: , ,

In the last two years, most Americans who lost jobs with health-insurance benefits also became uninsured.The massive job losses during the Great Recession not only hit Americans' bank accounts, but also -- in some cases -- their health. A new report by the Commonwealth Fund, a private foundation that backs health-policy research, estimates that 9 million adults lost their health insurance in the last two years.

In the U.S., the loss of a job also often comes with the loss of health insurance. According to the Commonwealth Fund survey, nearly a quarter (24%) of working-age adults -- an estimated 43 million -- had either lost their job or dealt with their spouse losing their job within the past two years. Of those who lost a job with health benefits, a majority (57%) also became uninsured.

"This survey tells a story of millions of Americans who lost their jobs during the recession, lost their health benefits too, and had essentially no place to turn for affordable health care coverage -- putting their health and financial security at risk," Commonwealth Fund president Karen Davis said in a statement.

Going Solo Proves Tough

Without their jobs, the unemployed have had great difficulty finding affordable coverage. Only 25% of those who lost their employer health insurance were able to get coverage through their spouse or other means, and only 14% continued their job-based coverage through the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act, better known as COBRA.

Sponsored Links
Many others tried to purchase individual coverage. But in the past three years, nearly three-quarters (71%) of the adults who tried to go it alone either had difficulty finding a plan that fit their needs or that they could afford, or were turned down for coverage -- or charged a higher price -- because of a pre-existing condition.

The Commonwealth Fund estimates that 52 million American adults (28% of working-age adults) found themselves uninsured at some point during 2010, up from 38 million (24%) in 2001.

Unsurprisingly, the situation was much worse for those who earn less. Some 54% of lower-income adults and 41% of moderate-income adults were uninsured for some time during the year, compared with only 13% of adults with higher incomes.

Skipping Health Care

Meanwhile, a whopping 60% more adults -- both insured and uninsured -- say they skimped on health care because of the cost in 2010 than in 2001. An estimated 75 million adults skipped doctor visits, failed to fill prescriptions or otherwise avoided health care to save money, according to the survey.

Back in November, another Commonwealth study back found that Americans are by far the most likely, among residents of industrialized nations, to go without health care because of costs.

More Americans -- insured and uninsured -- also are spending large shares of their income on health care and are having problems paying their medical bills or are paying off medical debt.

The result? Americans are making significant sacrifices: An estimated 29 million people have used up all of their savings to pay medical bills, while 22 million were unable to pay for basic necessities like food and 4 million declared bankruptcy as a result.

Affordable Care Act to "Bring Relief"

But there are some signs that the situation could improve. The Affordable Care Act provisions that are already in place are bringing some relief, the study authors claim.

"The silver lining is that the Affordable Care Act has already begun to bring relief to families," Davis says. "Once the new law is fully implemented, we can be confident that no future recession will have the power to strip so many Americans of their health security."

Once the law fully takes effect in 2014, nearly all the the 52 million Americans who are uninsured -- including those who lost their insurance during the recession -- will have access to comprehensive health insurance coverage, according to the report.

That could be an optimistic estimate, however. According to the Congressional Budget Office, the law will extend coverage to about 32 million people by 2019.

Permalink | Email this | Comments

]]>Commonwealth Fundemployer benefitsemployer healthcareemployer sponsored health careemployer-sponsored insuranceEmployer-sponsoredInsurancehealthhealth carehealth care reformhealth insurancehealth insurance costsHealth insurance premiumshealth insurance rateshealth insurance reformhealthcareHealthcareReforminsurancemedicalMelly AlazrakiWed, 16 Mar 2011 19:00:00 ESTPrescription Drug Prices Still Growing Stronghttp://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/03/16/prescription-drug-prices-still-growing-strong/http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/03/16/prescription-drug-prices-still-growing-strong/http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/03/16/prescription-drug-prices-still-growing-strong/#commentsFiled under: ,

Prescription-drug prices have been growing more quickly than the prices of other medical products and services, according to the Government Accountability Office.If your pharmacy bill seems to be growing larger faster, that's because it probably is. In the past four years, prescription-drug prices have increased much more quickly than the prices of other medical products and services, the nonpartisan Government Accountability Office said this week.

The GAO study, which Congress requested after the federal government spent $78 billion -- or about 31% of the $250 billion U.S. total -- on prescription drugs in 2009, found that prices for common prescription drugs grew at an average annual rate of 6.6% from 2006 through the first quarter of 2010. That's much higher than the medical consumer price index's 3.8% average annual increase.

And the prescription-drug-price hikes follow years of previous increases. In 2007, another GAO report found that the average price for commonly used brand-name prescription drugs had grown approximately 6% per year from January 2000 through January 2007.

Generic Prices Fall

But not all prescription drugs have been seeing price hikes. In its latest study, the GAO included 55 commonly used brand-name drugs and 45 common generic drugs. On average, the generic drugs' prices actually fell at an average annual rate of 2.6%, while the brand-name drugs' prices grew at an annual rate of 8.3%.

Sponsored Links
The growing gap between brand-name- and generic-drug prices means that many patients are switching to the generic versions, once they become available. The higher sales of generic drugs mean that, overall, the prices paid for each set of active ingredients increased only 2.6% per year, on average, not 6.6%.

Which drugs have seen the biggest hikes? Boehringer Ingelheim's enlarged-prostate-condition drug, Flomax, increased the most over the four-year period, adding 17.6% to its price. Sanofi-Aventis's (SNY) insomnia treatment, Ambien, came in second with a 15.2% boost. And Merck's (MRK) allergy pill, Clarinex, rounded out the top three, growing its price by 12.5%.

Is the Affordable Care Act Causing the Hikes?

In its study, the GAO also examined the allegation that drugmakers had jacked up prices ahead of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, which passed in March 2010. The agency found that prices during that discussion -- from the first quarter of 2009 through the first quarter of 2010 -- grew approximately 5.9%, which is lower than the increases seen in either of the previous two years, but higher than the growth in 2006.

The 2010 health-care law doesn't actually include a provision to control general drug prices. Beginning this year, it does give seniors a 50% discount for brand-name drugs when they hit the Medicare "donut hole," which is a huge gap in drug coverage that leaves some seniors on the hook for thousands of dollars in prescription expenses. The gap is expected to close completely by 2020.

Permalink | Email this | Comments

]]>affordable care actambienclarinexDonut Holedrugdrug pricesdrugsflomaxGAOGovernment Accountability Officehealthhealth carehealth care reformhealth insurancehealthcareHealthcareReformmedicaremedicare costsmedicare donut holeMedicarePartDprescriptionprescription drugprescription drugsprescription pricingPrescriptionMedicationprescriptionsMelly AlazrakiWed, 16 Mar 2011 12:00:00 ESTWHO's Swine Flu Pandemic Response Wasn't Influenced by Vaccine Makershttp://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/03/10/who-h1n1-swine-flu-pandemic-report-vaccine-makers/http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/03/10/who-h1n1-swine-flu-pandemic-report-vaccine-makers/http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/03/10/who-h1n1-swine-flu-pandemic-report-vaccine-makers/#commentsFiled under: ,

WHO's Swine Flu Pandemic Response Wasn't Influenced by Vaccine Makers During the H1N1 swine flu pandemic, much criticism was leveled at health officials accusing them of making recommendations that were too heavily influenced by the pharmaceutical industry -- a refrain often heard in relation to diseases that are treatable with vaccines.

Turns out, that wasn't the case, according to independent experts who examined the World Health Organization's handling of the H1N1 pandemic, there was no such influence.

Back in June 2009, the WHO announced that the novel variant of the influenza virus had spread enough to raise the pandemic alert level from Phase 5 to Phase 6 -- the highest level -- for the first time in decades. By August 2010, the pandemic, which turned out to be less severe than had been feared, moved to post pandemic stage.

The independent experts who analyzed the WHO's response, said in a draft report released Thursday that "WHO performed well in many ways during the pandemic, confronted systemic difficulties and demonstrated some shortcomings. The Committee found no evidence of malfeasance."
Critics assert that WHO vastly overstated the seriousness of the pandemic. However, reasonable criticism can be based only on what was known at the time and not on what was later learnt. The Committee found that evidence from early outbreaks led many experts at WHO and elsewhere to anticipate a potentially more severe pandemic than subsequently occurred.
...
As far as the Review Committee can determine, no critic of WHO has produced any direct evidence of commercial influence on decision-making.
That being said, the panel added that the WHO failed to well-manage potential conflicts of interest among Emergency Committee members. Further, it ignored criticism about potential conflicts, and its decision to keep the members' identity secret, although consistent with WHO practices to protect members from external pressures, raised suspicions.

In addition, other shortcomings about the WHO's handling of the pandemic added to general confusion:
  • The absence of a consistent, measurable and understandable depiction of severity of the pandemic.
  • Inadequately dispelling confusion about the definition of a pandemic.
  • A pandemic phase structure that was needlessly complex.
  • Numerous systemic difficulties that impeded WHO's ability to achieve a timely distribution of donated vaccines.
What's perhaps most alarming is the final conclusion of the committee, which will hold its last meeting in Geneva from March 28 to March 30 to finalize its report: "The world is ill-prepared to respond to a severe influenza pandemic or to any similarly global, sustained, and threatening public health emergency."

Meanwhile, a leading expert has warned in an article in the journal Nature that governments should launch a vaccination program now to guard against a possible H2N2 flu pandemic.

Vaccine makers such as GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), Novartis (NVS), AstraZeneca (AZN) and Sanofi-Aventis (SNY) were major supplier of the pandemic vaccine, and their financial results got a significant boost as a result.


Permalink | Email this | Comments

]]>Astrazenecadrug companiesepidemicexpertsGlaxoSmithKlineH1N1H1N1 Swine FluindependentNovartispharmaceuticalsSanofi Aventisswine fluswine flu pandemicvaccinevirusWHOWorld Health OrganizationMelly AlazrakiThu, 10 Mar 2011 15:30:00 ESTJohnson & Johnson Recalls Leaky Insulin Cartridgeshttp://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/03/08/johnson-and-johnson-recalls-45-000-leaky-insulin-cartridges/http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/03/08/johnson-and-johnson-recalls-45-000-leaky-insulin-cartridges/http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/03/08/johnson-and-johnson-recalls-45-000-leaky-insulin-cartridges/#commentsFiled under: ,

Johnson & Johnson Recalls 45,000 Leaky Insulin Cartridges Johnson & Johnson (JNJ) has issued another recall, and this time, it's not over a typo. The company's Animas unit recalled five lots of leaking insulin cartridges that could lead to serious health problems.

Animas, which claims its goal is to find "ways to make diabetes exceedingly manageable in every way," notified diabetic patients of the problem in a Feb. 24 letter after learning of several cases of leaking cartridges. The recall, Animas said, affects 2-milliliter cartridges shipped between Nov. 30 and Jan. 4.

The cartridges "can leak insulin, resulting in the delivery of less insulin than intended." The leaking cartridges may also prevent the insulin pump from sounding an alarm if there is a blockage in the infusion system, the letter said, and then emphasized:
Please note that under-delivery of insulin can cause high blood sugar and/or diabetic ketoacidosis. These are serious conditions that can cause severe health impact, including death.
Animas said it would replace the cartridges for free, and added it had also notified the Food and Drug Administration about the recall and informed physicians. According to Pharmalot, the recalled batch includes 45,000 faulty insulin cartridges.

FDA Also Warns About Stent Manufacturing Issues

In a separate matter, the New Brunswick, N.J., company also has received a warning letter from the FDA over manufacturing violations involving cardiovascular devices such as stents made at its Cordis unit's facility in San German, Puerto Rico.

Sponsored Links
The letter, sent to the company on Feb. 16 but made public Tuesday, specifically mentions two issues: Procedures failed to ensure all devices were manufactured with consistency, and controls failed to ensure that devices conform to their specifications.

This is a recurring issue at the plant: The FDA uncovered similar problems when it inspected it previously. The FDA letter notes that the responses so far from the company have been insufficient. "You should take prompt action to correct the violations addressed in this letter," the FDA wrote.

The small recall and the warning letter -- a form issued by the FDA to dozens of manufacturers -- would have likely been largely ignored if it weren't for the fact that J&J, the world's largest consumer health care company, has been plagued by massive recalls since 2009 that cost it $900 million in sales last year. The recalls of widely used products ranging from over-the-counter children's cold medicines to contact lenses have varied in severity, too -- from typos to leaky insulin cartridges to faulty hip implants.

As for the latter, J&J also took a product-liability charge related to the recall of certain DePuy hip implants of $922 million. On Monday, the president of DePuy Orthopaedics apparently "resigned his position to pursue outside interests," according to Dow Jones Newswires.

J&J's head honcho, however, Bill Weldon is not only staying for now, he even received a pay raise, despite overseeing a year of stunning recalls.


Permalink | Email this | Comments

]]>AnimasBill WeldondepuyFDAfood and drug administrationhip replacementinsulininsulin cartridge recallJJJohnson & Johnsonjohnson and johnson recallStentsMelly AlazrakiTue, 08 Mar 2011 16:15:00 ESTJapan Finds No Link Between Vaccines and Child Deathshttp://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/03/08/japan-no-link-between-vaccines-child-deaths/http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/03/08/japan-no-link-between-vaccines-child-deaths/http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/03/08/japan-no-link-between-vaccines-child-deaths/#commentsFiled under: , ,

Japan's health ministry said on Tuesday it would continue its suspension of pediatric vaccines made by Pfizer (PFE) and Sanofi-Aventis (SNY), despite finding no direct link between the vaccines and the deaths of four children.

Use of the vaccines, which protect children against bacterial infections that can lead to meningitis and pneumonia, was suspended late last week until a safety panel could meet to examine the cause of the deaths. The panel found no connection between the vaccines and the deaths, but it said further study was needed, Reuters reported. The committee will schedule another meeting to review additional data before making a recommendation on resuming vaccinations, according to Pfizer. The company added that it expects vaccinations will resume soon.

Sanofi-Aventis's ActHIB vaccine protects against haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib), one of the most common causes of bacterial meningitis, an infection of the covering of the brain and spinal cord. Pfizer's Prevnar vaccine (also sold as Prevenar) protects against pneumococcal bacteria that can cause ear infections, meningitis and pneumonia, among other things.

The four children, ranging in age from 3 months to 2 years, were administered Prevnar, and all except one received ActHIB at the same time. In addition, three received other vaccines on the same day. Three of the four children died a day after being immunized. Three of the deaths occurred last week.

Timing of Deaths Was Coincidental

In the U.S., both vaccines are part of the recommended childhood immunization schedule for children under 5 years old, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and are widely used. According to Sanofi, more than 130 million doses of its hib vaccine have been distributed in the U.S. since it was licensed in 1993.

Sponsored Links
"CDC and FDA have become aware that vaccination with [ActHIB and Prevnar] has been temporarily suspended as a precautionary measure in Japan while four death reports are examined," Shelly Burgess, a spokeswoman for the Food and Drug Administration told DailyFinance in an emailed statement.

"To date, physicians assessing vaccine safety at the FDA and CDC have not detected new safety concerns. . .among children vaccinated in the U.S. CDC and FDA will continue to monitor the safety of all vaccines, including [ActHIB and Prevnar] vaccines."

According to Forbes, experts in vaccine research say that in all likelihood, the deaths in Japan were coincidental, and that the Japanese health ministry acted too rashly.

ActHIB, Prevnar Prevent Thousands of Deaths Annually

The companies say they're cooperating with the Japanese government. "Pfizer supports the health ministry's conclusion that there is no evidence of a causal relationship to vaccination in these cases," a Pfizer spokeswoman told DailyFinance in an emailed statement. "Pfizer has also thoroughly and extensively examined these cases and all available data ... and has concluded that Prevenar meets all standards for distribution and use in Japan and in all countries where it is available."

"Sanofi Pasteur is fully collaborating [with the investigation]," a company spokeswoman told DailyFinance in an emailed statement. "No causal relationship has been established between immunizations and these fatalities."

According to Sanofi, since ActHIB's launch in 2008, it has been administered to an estimated 1.5 million people in over 3 million doses in Japan, while Pfizer Japan has distributed more than 2 million doses of Prevnar in that country. Worldwide, more than 200 million doses of ActHIB have been administered to children in over 120 countries, and Pfizer has distributed more than 360 million doses of Prevnar in more than 100 countries.

While vaccines can have rare, and usually mild, side effects, the diseases they prevent can lead to deaths. For example, 5% of children younger than 5 years old who contract pneumococcal meningitis will die of the infection, and others will have long-term problems such as blindness or hearing loss, according to CDC. Before the Hib vaccine, about 20,000 children in the U.S. under 5 years old got severe haemophilus influenzae type b each year, and nearly 1,000 people died from it annually.

Permalink | Email this | Comments

]]>ActHIBCDCCenters for Disease Control and PreventionchildrenCoincidencedeathsFDAfood and drug administrationhibJapan vaccinesJapanese health ministrymeningitispfizerpneumoniaPrevenarPrevnarSanofi AventisSanofi-AventisvaccinationsvaccinesMelly AlazrakiTue, 08 Mar 2011 12:30:00 ESTCan't Sleep? Maybe It's Your Late-Night Technology Usehttp://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/03/07/late-night-technology-use-and-sleeplessness/http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/03/07/late-night-technology-use-and-sleeplessness/http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/03/07/late-night-technology-use-and-sleeplessness/#commentsFiled under: ,

InsomniaPut away your iPad, turn off your BlackBerry and don't even look in the direction of your PlayStation before you go to bed. That's what researchers believe could help Americans sleep better following results from the 2011 Sleep in America poll, which finds that the use of communications technology in the hour before bedtime is pervasive and perhaps unhealthy.

Almost everyone surveyed in the poll, 95%, uses some type of electronics like a TV, computer, video game or cell phone at least a few nights a week within the hour before going to bed.

"Over the last 50 years, we've seen how television viewing has grown to be a near constant before bed, and now we are seeing new information technologies such as laptops, cell phones, video games and music devices rapidly gaining the same status," Dr. Lauren Hale of Stony Brook University Medical Center says in a statement.

TV Viewing Still Tops

These devices may be "abused to the point that they contribute to getting less sleep at night, leaving millions of Americans functioning poorly the next day," says Dr. Russell Rosenberg, vice chairman of the National Sleep Foundation (NSF), which released the poll on Monday just in time for National Sleep Awareness Week.

TV remains the most common activity before bed, with about two-thirds of baby boomers (46- to 64-year-olds) and generation X'ers (30- to 45-year-olds) reporting watching TV almost every night before bedtime, as did about half of the generation Y'ers (19- to 29-year-olds) and generation Z'ers (13 to 18-year-olds).

The second most common activity is computer or laptop use, with roughly six in 10 (61%) saying they use their laptops or computers at least a few nights a week within the hour before bed.

But Dr. Charles Czeisler of Harvard Medical School warns that "[a]rtificial light exposure between dusk and the time we go to bed at night suppresses release of the sleep-promoting hormone melatonin, enhances alertness and shifts circadian rhythms to a later hour -- making it more difficult to fall asleep."

The More Interactive, the Worse?

The poll indeed finds that many Americans (43%) between the ages of 13 and 64 say they rarely or never get a good night's sleep on weeknights. More than half (60%) say they experience a sleep problem every night or almost every night.

Sponsored Links
Generation Z'ers and generation Y'ers report more sleepiness than generation X'ers and baby boomers. Generation Z'ers report sleeping an average of 7 hours and 26 minutes on weeknights, much less than the 9 hours and 15 minute recommended by experts.

This could be partly due to technology use, the researchers say, especially when differentiating between passive activities such as TV and music and interactive activities like Internet, videogames and texting. "The hypothesis is that the latter devices are more alerting and disrupt the sleep-onset process," says Dr. Michael Gradisar of Flinders University in Australia.

Sure enough, generation Z'ers and generation Y'ers are about twice as likely as generation X'ers and baby boomers to say they play a video game within the hour before bedtime at least a few times a week. Similarly, cell-phone use, specifically texting and talking on the phone, shows an even greater age gap.

"Serious Consequences"

Cell phones were also a sleep disturbance with about in one in 10 Gen Z'ers (9%) saying they're awakened after they go to bed every night or almost every night by a phone call, text message or email.

"The higher use of these potentially more sleep-disruptive technologies among younger generations may have serious consequences for physical health, cognitive development and other measures of well being," says Hale. Gradisar adds: "If you feel that these activities are alerting or causing you anxiety, try doing something more 'passive' to help you wind down before bed."

Permalink | Email this | Comments

]]>2011 Sleep in America pollColumnsinsomniaNational Sleep Awareness WeekSleep researchsleeplessnesstechnology and sleepMelly AlazrakiMon, 07 Mar 2011 17:50:00 ESTPfizer and Sanofi-Aventis Vaccines Suspended in Japanhttp://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/03/07/pfizer-sanofi-aventis-vaccines-suspended-in-japan/http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/03/07/pfizer-sanofi-aventis-vaccines-suspended-in-japan/http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/03/07/pfizer-sanofi-aventis-vaccines-suspended-in-japan/#commentsFiled under: ,

Japan's health ministry announced it has suspended the use of two vaccines, one from Pfizer (PFE) and the other from Sanofi-Aventis (SNY), following the deaths of four children.

Sanofi-Aventis's ActHIB vaccine protects against haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib), one of the most common causes of bacterial meningitis (an infection of the covering of the brain and spinal cord). Pfizer's Prevnar vaccine protects against the streptococcus pneumoniae bacteria, which cause different pneumococcal infections, including otitis media (ear infection) and bacterial meningitis.

Sponsored Links
The four children, ranging in age from three months to two years, were administered Prevnar, according to The Japan Times, and all except one received ActHIB as well, according to information Sanofi received from the ministry. In addition, all except one received a mixed vaccine against diphtheria, whooping cough and tetanus on the same day they received the other vaccines. Three of the four children died a day after being immunized. Three of the deaths occurred last week.

So far authorities haven't found a causal relationship between the vaccines and the children's deaths. Some of them had underlying illnesses. A safety panel will meet Tuesday to examine the cases and discuss the cause of the deaths, the ministry said. Sanofi and Pfizer both said they are fully collaborating with the investigation. The two vaccines will be suspended until at least then, but Sanofi added the ministry did not request a recall of the vaccine.

No Link to Prevnar Found in Europe Deaths

In a similar scare in the Netherlands last year, authorities found no relation between Prevnar and the deaths of three infants, according to Reuters.

Japan has been notoriously slow to accept vaccines following a measles, mumps and rubella shot in 1989 that sickened 1,040 people, three of whom died. Since then Japan has certified about half as many vaccines in the past two decades as the U.S., according to Bloomberg. There have been concerns about the safety of vaccinations and lack of public information about vaccines, and the recent scare will likely not help.

The Hib vaccine, which was first approved in 1992 in Europe, and in the U.S. a few years later, wasn't approved in Japan until more than a decade later in 2007. Over 200 million doses of ActHIB have been administered to children in over 120 countries. Prevnar was approved in the U.S. in 2000, but not in Japan until 2009. To date, Pfizer has distributed more than 360 million doses of the vaccine in more than 100 countries.

Without a Hib shot, the rate of meningitis in Japan rose 36% from 1996 to to 11.7 children per 100,000 in 2005, according to a study at Chiba University. In the U.S., cases of meningitis caused by Hib dropped 94% from 1986 to 0.2 per 100,000 in 1995, because of vaccines, according to research published in the New England Journal of Medicine.

Since its launch in 2008, ActHIB has been administered to an estimated 1.55 million people in over 3 million doses in Japan, Sanofi said. Pfizer Japan has distributed more than 2 million doses (as of February 2011), Pfizer said.

While it's critical to ascertain the safety of vaccines, it's also important to remember what diseases they prevent, as the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention explains.

Sanofi reported sales of €984 million for its Polio/Pertussis/Hib vaccines in 2010. SNY shares traded 0.7% lower Monday in midday trading. Worldwide, Pfizer reported $2.42 billion in sales in 2010 for Prevnar 13, which protects against 13 strains of streptococcus pneumoniae, and $1.25 billion in sales for Prevnar 7, which protects against seven strains of the bacteria. PFE shares were down more than 1%.


Permalink | Email this | Comments

]]>ActHIBbacterial meningitisear infectionmeningitisPfizerPrevnarSanofi Aventissanofi-aventisStreptococcusPneumoniaevaccine debateMelly AlazrakiMon, 07 Mar 2011 13:50:00 ESTNot Exactly 'Pay for Performance' for These Big Pharma CEOshttp://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/03/03/pay-for-poor-performance-for-big-pharma-ceos/http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/03/03/pay-for-poor-performance-for-big-pharma-ceos/http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/03/03/pay-for-poor-performance-for-big-pharma-ceos/#commentsFiled under: , , , ,

Pile of cashMost workers would worry about losing their jobs, let alone receiving a bonus, if they slacked off, but CEOs are held to a different standard. For example, despite several stumbles, GlaxoSmithKline's (GSK) CEO got a nice bonus, and Johnson & Johnson's (JNJ) CEO even got a raise for a job badly done.

British drugmaker GlaxoSmithKline CEO Andrew Witty's base pay of 1 million pounds ($1.63 million) in 2010 was reported by some as "unchanged" when in fact it increased by 52,000 pounds (nearly $85,000) -- a respectable annual pay for most people. However, Witty's bonus was cut by 41% to 1.177 million pounds million from 2 million pounds in 2009, according to GSK's annual report.

A Bonus for What?

Overall, his pay was cut by 734,000 pounds from 3 million pounds to 2.3 million pounds last year after GSK missed its profit targets. Last month, Glaxo posted a fourth-quarter net loss because of a huge legal charge related to "U.S. sales and promotional practices and for product liability cases" regarding its controversial type 2 diabetes drug Avandia.

For the year, reported sales fell 1%, thanks partly to the continued effect of generic competition to herpes treatment Valtrex, the rapid loss of sales of Avandia following the European Union ban and the Food and Drug Administration's restriction because of cardiovascular risk, the company said.

Should Witty have gotten a bonus at all? Well, the company said in the report that "Despite 2010 being a challenging year for GSK. . .management achieved key financial and strategic objectives." Among those it mentioned were delivering underlying sales growth of 4.5% (excluding the above factors), strong performance in emerging markets and consumer health care, increasing the R&D pipeline potential and simplification of GSK's business model.

This "simplification" included 5,201 jobs cut, any of whom would have likely preferred a smaller bonus over being laid off.

Yet Another Recall

When it comes to Johnson & Johnson's CEO William Weldon, things are even less clear. The largest consumer health care company has been plagued by a huge amount of recalls since 2009 that cost it $900 million in sales last year. J&J also took a product-liability charge related to the recall of certain DePuy hip implants of $922 million.

Sponsored Links
Only Wednesday, another recall came to light, this time of surgical sutures in December because of potentially faulty packaging seals that raised a contamination risk, Reuters reported. The staggering number of recalls range from potentially harmful products reaching consumers to a simple typo on package instructions and involved products from children's medicines to contact lenses.

What did Weldon get in return? A pay raise. The New Brunswick, N.J.-based company hiked the CEO's salary 3% to $1.92 million effective Jan. 1, up from $1.86 million in the previous year, according to a Securities & Exchange Commission filing. However, the company cut Weldon's annual bonus 45% to $1.97 million from $3.6 million in 2009, which seems the least it could do in light of J&J's troubles.

A Top Job-Cutter

For 2009, Weldon was the second-highest paid CEO with a total compensation of $25.6 million -- three times the average for CEOs of S&P 500 companies -- and over 500 times the median household income (of $49,777 in 2009 according to the Census Bureau). In that year, J&J laid off 9,000 people, which landed Weldon a mention as one of the CEOs who earned significantly more than their peers as they cut the most jobs during the recession.

J&J is expected to release Weldon's total compensation for 2010 next month, according to the Associated Press, but we already know it includes 560,691 stock options at $62.20 each, and 1,357,855 Certificates of Long-Term Performance at $5.03 each. It will be interesting to hear the reasoning behind this "pay-for-performance."

Permalink | Email this | Comments

]]>Andrew Wittyceo payColumnsexecutive compensationGlaxoSmithKlineJohnson & JohnsonWilliam WeldonMelly AlazrakiThu, 03 Mar 2011 17:00:00 ESTPfizer Shrinks Its Drug Pipeline Amid R&D Cutshttp://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/03/01/pfizer-shrinks-its-drug-pipeline-amid-randd-cuts/http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/03/01/pfizer-shrinks-its-drug-pipeline-amid-randd-cuts/http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/03/01/pfizer-shrinks-its-drug-pipeline-amid-randd-cuts/#commentsFiled under: ,

Pfizer says it has discontinued 15 of the projects in its development pipeline as it works to cut its R&D expenses. Pfizer (PFE) on Tuesday said it is discontinuing 15 of the projects in its development pipeline. The news comes a month after the world's largest pharmaceutical company announced large cuts to its research and development.

In an update of its development pipeline, Pfizer said it is "prioritizing its research and development efforts in areas with the greatest scientific and commercial promise: immunology and inflammation, oncology, cardiovascular and metabolic diseases, neuroscience and pain, and vaccines."

Sponsored Links
The number of discontinued projects has slowed from Pfizer's last update in September, when it said it had discontinued 31 projects. However, the pace of the progress of its other projects also seems to have slowed. Only 17 projects are either new or have advanced to a new phase since September, while 25 projects had progressed in the September update.

Examples of drugs that have advanced since the previous update include Tafamidis meglumine, a treatment for a rare liver condition, which moved up to the registration phase; and inotuzumab ozogamicin for aggressive lymphoma, which moved up to Phase 3.

How the Pipeline Looks Now

The newly discontinued projects included two potential new indications for Lyrica, a fibromialgia treatment; as well as three potential new drugs to treat cancer; two potential new drugs for Alzheimer's disease; and the potential use of Chantix, which is used to help people quit smoking, to help treat Alzheimer's patients. The discontinued projects were from all the different stages, ranging from Phase I -- or early trials -- to registration, one of the last steps before a drug can be marketed.

According to the update, Pfizer now has a total of 118 projects, including both the development of new drugs and of new indications for existing drugs. Of these, nine are in the registration phase; 25 are in Phase III, or advanced trials; 35 are in Phase II trials; and 49 are in Phase I.

Thirty of the projects, more than a quarter of the pipeline, are for biologics, which are medicines created by biological processes instead of via chemistry. Four of the projects are for vaccines, while the rest are for small molecules, or regular chemical-based drugs.

Because biologics are harder to replicate and their approval process remains vastly complex, many pharmaceutical companies have been turning to biologics to help stave off the so-called patent cliff.

The development of new drugs makes up 93 of the projects, with four in the registration stage, 13 in Phase III, 27 in Phase II, and 49 in Phase I.

More Cuts Likely to Come

Pfizer warned that month that cuts were coming. When it posed its latest earnings in early February, Pfizer said that it planned to cut its R&D expenses to just $6.5 billion next year, down from $8 billion this year and $9.4 billion in 2010.

Pfizer also said it was exiting a major research and development center in England -- where Viagra was discovered -- within two years, laying off most of its 2,400 employees.

It's no wonder that deep R&D cuts -- and the reorganization of its pipeline -- are needed. Drugs that make up 42% of Pfizer's pharmaceutical revenue are slated to lose patent protection between 2010 and 2012. Among those headed for the patent cliff include best-selling cholesterol fighter Lipitor, which accounts for more than $10 billion a year in sales.


Permalink | Email this | Comments

]]>drugdrug developmentdrugshealthhealth carehealthcareLipitormedicalmedicationmedicinepatentpatent cliffpatentspfizerPfizer drugsPfizer Inc.pharmapharmaceuticalpharmaceutical companiespharmaceuticalsr and drdresearchresearch and developmenttreatmenttreatmentsMelly AlazrakiTue, 01 Mar 2011 20:00:00 EST