FREE AND CHEAP DRUGS YA'LL

Hey Tumblr, if you’re poor, under-or-unemployed, and/or uninsured, you can probably get free drugs directly from the manufacturers. 

Yeah, free. Like seriously all you pay for is maybe the doctor/nurse visit you’ll probably need to go to for the prescription. 

The basics, because every program is different:

You need:

  • to fill out a buttload of paperwork, which is a pain in the buns, but FREE MEDS
  • a prescription for the medication(s) you’re trying to obtain, which means you’ll need to find a doctor or nurse practitioner (someone who can legally write scripts), whom you can also probably see for free at a community clinic if you’re willing to chill on a waiting list for three months.
  • proof of residence, official ID, utility bill, something like that
  • probably your most recent W-2 or paystub, to prove you need assistance. if you make a “decent” amount but maybe have tremendous bills or something, some companies will make exceptions if you take the time to write a letter explaining the situation, and maybe include a pile of copies of your bills. if you’ve been unemployed for a while or have never worked, they’ll probably ask you to explain how you get by, or to provide proof that you’re getting food stamps or something of the sort. 
  • that’s pretty much it.
  • like i said, every company is different, so make sure you read every line of the requirements, because it’s a pain in the arse to send all your shit in and find out that whoops you forgot to draw a unicorn on the lower left-hand corner of your 2011 W-2 form or some ridic shit

Links to patient assistance programs; feel free to add your own:

Lilly (Byetta, Cymbalta, Glucagon, Humalog, Humulin, Livalo, Prozac, Quinidine, ReoPro, Strattera, Xigris, Sybyax, Zyprexa) : http://www.lillytruassist.com/pages/FindProgram.aspx

Sanofi-Aventis (Apidra, Lantus, Clolar, Jevtana, Elitek, Leukine, Eloxatin, Mozobil, Eligard, Lovenox, Rilutek, Multaq, Priftin) : https://patientassistanceprogram.sanofi-aventis.us/index.html

abbott (ANDROGEL, PROMETRIUM, Advicor, Creon, Depakote, Gengraf, Humira, Kaletra, Synthroid, Tarka, and several more) : http://www.abbottpatientassistancefoundation.org/pharmaceutical_products.asp

Pfizer (lots and lots of drugs; I have gotten free Zoloft from them in the past) : http://www.pfizerhelpfulanswers.com/pages/Application/Application.aspx

Basically, pretty much every major pharmaceutical company has some sort of free/discount drug program; you just have to dig around to find it because nobody tells us about them unless they’re those rare sorts of doctors who actually advocate for their patients.

Betting that money is more persuasive than words, more employers vow to use financial rewards and penalties to prod their workers to fitness in 2012. Employers have seen serious problems related to obesity, she said, including higher rates of depression, absenteeism, low productivity and more medical claims. An overweight employee costs employers $5,000 more a year in health costs than a healthy-weight individual. The survey of 335 employers found that the share of companies that used financial rewards in health management programs increased to 54% in 2011 from 36% in 2009. In 2012, about 80% of companies plan to offer financial rewards.

Here’s a fun twist I will believe in until I am convinced it isn’t true: creepy neon murder lichen is the (undiscovered) only cure for frontotemporal dementia! Gets rid of nasty fox infestations AND reverses neurological damage!

Next season’s villain: the pharmaceutical company trying to get all members of the McCall pack to sign nondisclosure agreements about their knowledge of the special plant and its properties. They are pretty aggressive about it. Sometimes their rep interrupts while everyone is sitting in the big corner booth at the local diner, sipping on milkshakes. “Go AWAY,” Scott says to Mr. Sampson, who frowns and closes his briefcase. Isaac rolls his eyes and eats some onion rings. Lydia feeds Allison a bite of her patty melt. Kira rolls a gumball across the table at Derek, who smiles sleepily from his spot curled up under Stiles’s arm. “I’m a medical miracle,” Stiles mumbles around his curly fries. Every episode features the pack doing normal, pleasant things, with one semi-irritating interruption from Mr. Sampson. He bugs them at mini-golf. He annoys them when they’re playing cribbage at the local coffee shop. He spies on them while they sit on a picnic blanket in the park, eating finger sandwiches and giving each other hand massages.

"Is Mr. Sampson seriously watching us through the eyeholes he cut in a newspaper?" Scott asks, lifting his head from Kira’s lap.

"I’m worried about that guy," Allison admits, pressing her thumbs into the palm of Derek’s left hand while Isaac braids her hair. "Maybe we should send him a fruit basket."

Pfizer Looking for Billions in Tax Inversion Benefits With AstraZeneca Merger

Pfizer Inc. (NYSE:PFE) has a tax inversion pill that will pump huge benefits out of the $106 billion mega-merger it is angling for with AstraZeneca PLC (LSE: AZN).

image

The company’s executives have publicly talked up the potential benefits of the merger, including more than $1 billion in tax savings per year.

As things stand now, AstraZeneca has once again refused the sweetened $106 billion offer made by Pfizer. But if they were to accept it, Pfizer would then be able to shift its corporate headquarters from New York City to Europe.

It’s a nice twofer that gives Pfizer the advantage of the enhanced European reach while at the same time giving it a readymade tax inversion strategy to hightail it out of Uncle Sam’s tax reach.

Pfizer, one of the world’s largest pharmaceutical companies, has been headquartered in NYC since it was founded in 1849 in Brooklyn.

A relocation of the company’s headquarters to Europe would result in the loss of billions of dollars in local, state and federal tax revenues.

Not to mention the loss of jobs and other spending that would follow the company’s headquarters across the Atlantic.

Note that an inversion doesn’t necessarily mean the company would move its operational headquarters. That would still be in NYC, but the official headquarters would be in Europe.

This would allow the company to bring in vast cash hoards that are currently being kept outside the U.S. in order to avoid the hefty tax bill it would attract. Pfizer currently keeps more than 70 percent of its cash reserves out of the U.S. to avoid being taxed on it as income.

In a conference call with investors, Pfizer CFO Frank D’Amelio said that if the holding company which would be the parent of Pfizer and AstraZeneca was located in the U.K., it would lower the company’s effective tax rate going forward.

Pfizer currently pays an effective tax rate of27.4 percent, while AstraZeneca’s effective tax rate is much lower at 21.3 percent. It is estimated that a single percentage point drop in Pfizer’s effective tax rate would mean annual tax savings of up to $200 million.

The U.K. additionally offers more tax benefits, including R&D tax credits and a lower tax rate on income from patents.   

Be that as it may, any move by Pfizer to retain operational headquarters in NYC while avoiding paying corporate income tax would be seen by lawmakers and the powers-that-be in Albany and Washington D.C. as anotherinversion tax law fail. It would make federal approval for the merger more difficult, if not impossible.

Photo credit - Norbert Nagel/wikipedia 

Three leading senators are inquiring into drugmaker Pfizer Inc’s efforts to limit the sale of generic versions of its Lipitor cholesterol drug, which lost U.S. patent protection this week. Their concern was prompted by a newspaper report earlier this month that Pfizer had struck deals with leading insurers and pharmacy benefits managers, who negotiate prices on behalf of companies and insurers, to offer discounts on Lipitor if they block prescriptions for its generic versions

10

Gustav Pfizer. Der Nibelunge Noth. Illustriert mit Holzschnitten nach Zeichnungen von Julius Schnorr von Carolsfeld und Eugen Neureuther die Bearbeitung des Textes von Dr. Gustav Pfizer. Published 1843 by Cotta’scher Verlag in Stuttgart, Tübingen.

Medical Conspiracy/Crime #1

The pfizer company is considered to be one of the biggest pharmaceutical giant in the world. This comes with constant scrutiny by the global community, and in 1996 something terrible happened.

Trovan, a new antibiotic being developed by pfizer needed to be tested. Just around that time a breakout of meningitis and measles broke out in Nigeria.. and Pfizer used this opportunity to try the drug out in a “clinical trial”.

This resulted in 200 children who were given treatment with Trovan… The antibiotic resulted in 11 deaths and many others with organ failures and various other fatal symptoms. The scariest part of this is that Pfizer apparently set up a booth to distribute the drugs next to a MSF (doctors without borders) clinic. 

anonymous said:

I wonder why vegan tumblr is so quiet on the matter of animal testing, re: ebola vaccine? It just shows how great that we have all these at the hand of scientists. There was a very preliminary vaccine that was still not in the clinical trial phase AND it saved lives. With ongoing research, Pfizer hopes to put it on the mass market next year. So please do explain in lights of the horror that is happening in West Africa, how is it that you value mice's lives over humans'?

Sorry for the delay in getting back to you on this.

I am not quite sure what this “silence” is that you attribute to tumblr vegans… I can’t speak for anyone else in the community but for me personally there has been very little information released about the vaccine in its early stages and I dislike commenting on things without a good amount of information. For that reason I’m mostly going to talk about animal testing more generally here.

You are making a bit of a fallacy in this claim, in that you are assuming the only way this drug could have possibly been developed is through animal testing. The effective drugs on the market have been tested on animals, but it does not follow that these things have been effective because they have been tested on animals. In the UK for example, any new drug must be tested on at least two mammals to be considered fit for market. Now, that does not mean those drugs came about because they were tested on animals, they could be (and in many cases, are) the result of much more advanced and less victorian methods of testing drugs. 

It is not the case that we treat this by testing on animals or we don’t treat it at all. There are a wealth of alternatives like en vitro, test methods and models based on human cell and tissue cultures, computerised patient-drug databases and virtual drug trials, computer models and simulations, stem cell and genetic testing methods, non-invasive imaging techniques such as MRIs and CT Scans, and micro dosing, to name a few. There are many well respected figures in the bio-medical community who do not believe animal testing is in any way helpful anymore. We have undoubtedly gained a great deal from animal testing in the past, but people like Nobel-prize winning biologist Sir Peter Medawar pointed out that we will be at a point where we can dispense with animal research altogether in as few as ten years time, and that was in 1972. 

Even ignoring ethical considerations, the animal model of research is deeply flawed, 9 out of 10 drugs that pass animal tests still go on to fail or cause harm in clinical trials. UK based companies like Pharmagene use human tissue exclusively, not out of any ethical considerations, but because they believe that the animal testing model is scientifically redundant. Animals do not get many of the diseases that humans do, so these diseases must be artificially inducted. This simply does not give us an accurate measure of how authentically caught diseases will respond to treatment, human cell  tissue gives us a much more accurate picture. To use cancer as an example, Fran Visco, founder of the National Breast Cancer Coalition said, “Animals don’t reflect the reality of cancer in humans. We cure cancer in animals all the time, but not in people.” As for the metholodolgy, it is widely known that animal experiments have serious limitations in that results in humans cannot be extrapolated from results in animals. A mixture of high dosage, stress conditions of animals in confinement mean there are simply too many variables to gain reliable results. Lets also look at what we actually gain from animal testing. Last year, globally, we killed 115 million animals in scientific experiments, yet the FDA approved only 35 new treatments. 115 million lives, for 35 new drugs? Does that sound like an efficient research model to you? Today’s drug companies do the actual research with computer based and stem cell models, and are simply obliged to test on animals once that process has been completed, in many cases slowing down the process rather than helping it. For every research organisation you can name me that is testing on animals, I can link you one that is having equal or superior results using non-animal models. 

What is happening in West Africa and elsewhere is horrific, but you are making a mistake if you assume that the only two options we have available are animal testing or let everyone die. I think you are guilty of a rather obvious confirmation bias here. You’re assuming because animal research has been done, that animal research is the only way it could have possibly done, with very little possible evidence to back up that claim. Animal testing is inefficient, expensive, out of date and utterly unethical. On a personal level, I absolutely do not believe that animal lives have any less inherent value than human lives. You may believe it is perfectly okay for 115 million animals to suffer every year so long as it benefits a higher number of humans, but we do not have to look very far into our own human history to see horrific examples of this cold, utilitarian idea in which it is acceptable for a minority to suffer for the good of the majority. The idea that some lives matter less than others has been responsible for some of the most horrific injustices in human history, and I do not believe this is an ethos any serious thinker should entertain.I honestly believe that at this point, the only thing we still have to learn from animal testing is the depths of cruelty that humans are willing to inflict on sentient beings. 

As I stare at an ink blot
Thinking why I think the thoughts I think
Paying 20 gs a year straight to my shrink
To analyze me on a couch
And while hes zoning out
Im tuning in to my inner child
So that explains why I get wild
On the weekend drinking no tomorrow
Sleep around to ease my sorrow
And it all relates to what happened in second grade
I am told there is a name for what is wrong inside my brain
And that fact alone makes me feel like Im hardly that insane
Ive undergone psychoanalysis
My dreams all full of phalluses
Psychotropics I imbibe
So happy to be prescribed
What I get from Pfizers not much different from Budweiser
In the end, you and I just fated to pretend
—  K.Flay

This is massive government in action, folks. Because of ridiculous regulations, rules and complete government incompetence, it is possible for someone to sue a drug company because of the side effects of a drug that company doesn’t even make (H/T: AoSHQ).

A court in Alabama has ruled that Pfizer Inc. can be sued over harmful side effects caused by generic versions of its drugs.

My first thought while reading the article was that this is outrageous judicial overreach in a state that has historically been somewhat known for being friendly to plaintiffs. It is, I thought, just allowing plaintiffs to go in search of the deepest pockets in the hopes of getting the largest possible recovery.

Then I read further. And it turns out that generic manufacturers are not allowed to put warning labels on drugs unless those warnings are also in the warning label for the original brand-name drug. That’s when I realized that this was a classic case of outrageous regulatory incompetence. Oblivious bureaucrats at the Food and Drug Administration created a ridiculous situation in which Pfizer can be sued for a product it didn’t make.

Then I read further. And it turns out that the FDA has proposed a new rule that would allow generic-drug manufacturers to add labeling to their products independently. And guess who’s blocking it?

The generic drug manufacturers, of course. They’ve got a pretty sweet deal right now: They get the profits, while the folks who actually did all that expensive research to develop the drug bear a lot of the liability. They’re in no hurry to have that change.

paigethecynic said:

I don't know if you've posted something like this before but it might be helpful to your followers. The Pfizer Rx Pathways website (I would post the link but you can't do that in asks) can get you FREE or discounted prescriptions if you're low income including forms of birth control like depo provera and I believe some forms of the pill.

^!!!!!

Text
Photo
Quote
Link
Chat
Audio
Video