Comments on: Walgreens Accused Of Scamming Taxpayers

A Look Inside What's Been Called America's Biggest Pharmacy's Pill-Flipping Scheme

[soshljustic]

Im curious Atty Behn, did you have to show that fraud actually existed through proof of the defendant finding out the fee schedule of payments through each state versus other states, as opposed to a consequential occurance in contractual buying preferences for each pharmacy in the affected states, therefore not fraud, but merely looking as fraud and framed as fraud? What proof of Fraud in price fixing according to services rendered (pills) because they would garner a higher payout. Still moot and easy to see why it may go to appeal. Unfortunate we cannot get all scripts to list brands or generic and pharma company which manufactures, but then the sales reps to dr offices would be really overburdened with drug toys, if that would ever occur. Media already inundated with drug ads, would be all drug ads, and the prices would skyrocket.

[rafterman1]

===why do you people always look to the government to do things for you?===
Posted by jamesm12341 at 09:43 AM : Jun 14, 2008

Maybe because, by the end of my life, I will have contributed in taxes over $400,000 dollars more than I will have gotten back from the government. So, not only do I "expect things from the government", they should come to my house and make my breakfast every morning for $400,000.

Why do you people b i t c h and moan about us "expecting things from the government" when it is the government that is freeloading of of us? You are a sucker and the government laughs at you for being so stupid as to defend them for stealing noney out of your pocket.

[edjeep]

I was prescribed to take Prilosec by my doctor. I was written a prescription. I knew the drug was generic and sold over the counter and figured I would be charged the generic price. Walgreens filled the prescription by giving me capsules, not tablets, and told me the prescription was $120. I told the lady at the Pharmacy counter that Prilosec was generic. I was told the capsules were $120. I just told her I would just get them off the shelf in the anti acid section. I went over and got two packs of the generic tablets for a fraction of the cost. I walked out of the store wondering how many people were being treated like this (I have no insurance and she wanted me to pay for the capsules). You call it as you see it I just wanted to share.

[soshljustic]

Congrats Michael Behn!! Read the case and my state is one of those involved in the overbilling scheme. You will surely have you work cut out for you in the future, especially in regards to billings for psych and veterans health care as regards secondary payors. Wish I was working in your offices, would be fun to watch what private insurance,will be forced to eat as secondary payor on spousal coverages if the VA can''t get it together, private industry won''t get the overbill luxury,but private insurance will have to pay out by virtue of a marriage license, and raise everyones insurance rates at the same time.

[soshljustic]

"Writing the brand name of a drug on a script does not guarantee it will be filled that way."Ttue unless followed by the words ''no substitutions please''at which time the pharmacy must fill with the requested brand regardless of the insurance policy. A good portion of us know it is the time release properties that differ amongst the chemicals used in the array of brand/generic drugs. They are not all the same and have varying amounts of chemical properties at varying weights which accounts for the difference in time release properties, although of the same chemical make-up, and also accounts for differences in cost as well as how much funding will be taken for research monies from the sale, plus other business expenses. The bottom line, besides ''physician heal thyself'' mentality in medical ethics--the public must adopt a concerted effort to manage their healthcare dollars, which the public never wants to do. See what people pay for healthcare out of their own pockets and how they shop for healthcare when they have to be more concerned about the dollars? The public has not cared what insurance has funded, whether T18, T19, or private insurance. This nation cannot afford a national healthcare system with the public mentality it currently holds toward spending someone elses healthcare dollars.It is the big reason boutique medicine is on the upswing.

[michaelbehn]

Thank you for your attention to this important case. For court filings and other invformation, please visit the reference Web site www.PharmacyFraudSettlement.com.

[toldyouso12]

Addendum:

If the patient objects, they will supply the brand name. Writing the brand name of a drug on a script does not guarantee it will be filled that way.

Posted by toldyouso12 at 09:29 PM : Jun 14, 2008

If a doctor wants no substitutions, he might preface or end with the word "only" or write do not sub or check a box that does not allow substitution if he is filling the description electronically. Of course if the product is less than 20 years old, there should only be the brand name as it is still under patent.

[toldyouso12]

If they put the brand name on the script, the pharmacy has to fill with the Brand name drug. If the MD writes the script for only the drug name, the pharmacy can fill with any generic brand they have in stock, produced by any pharma company.
Posted by soshljustic at 09:21 PM : Jun 14, 2008


Each drug has 3 names. A chemical name, a brand name and a generic name. The chemical name usually contains the primary active ingredient and the carrier vehicle for the product (like a hydrochloride). The brand name is the catchy name the inventor of the product calls the product and the generic name is the primary chemical and the specific carrier ingredient that mfg used--which could be different from the one first used when it was invented. Thus, Vincristine hydrochloride, would be the same as Vincristine sulfate in theory meaning the assay of the primary ingred and potency would be within a certain range (as decided by the pharmacopeia. If a doctor writes a script for a brand name, the pharmacy can substitute a generic depending on who the insurance company is and what that company''s rules are. If the pharm subs the drug, they will usually tell the patient that they have substituted to the generic and saved them ___ dollars. If the patient objects, they will supply the brand name. Writing the brand name of a drug on a script does not guarantee it will be filled that way.

[soshljustic]

They(walgreens) technically did not do anything wrong! what they did was unethical only! MD''s put the drug name on the script, or the brand name. If they put the brand name on the script, the pharmacy has to fill with the Brand name drug. If the MD writes the script for only the drug name, the pharmacy can fill with any generic brand they have in stock, produced by any pharma company. Where is personal agency in this in making the taxpayer responsible and more cost-aware? Or--are we always going to blame companies for seeing the loopholes which ordinary citizens declare as not their responsibility to make themselves aware of? This is what we have to look forward to in spending on a national healthcare plan. Our fellow citizens using healthcare resources irrationally and then wanting to lay the blame at the alter of corporate greed, when it is plain old citizen irresponsibility and a lack of personal agency-otherwise known as pork barreling on the level of the lower classes with the expectation it be written off as ignorance, lack of common sense, or some other inept justification for not giving a rip about how the tax-payers money is spent-pork barreling poor is as vulgar as pork barreling wealthy in my book.

[soshljustic]

They(walgreens) technically did not do anything wrong! what they did was unethical only! MD''s put the drug name on the script or the brand name. If they put the brand name on the script, the pharmacy has to fill with the Brand name drug. If the MD writes the script for only the drug name, the pharmacy can fill with any generic brand they have in stock, produced by any pharma company. Where is personal agency in this in making the taxpayer responsible and more cost-aware? Or--are we always going to blame companies for seeing the loopholes which ordinary citizens declare as not their responsibility to make themselves aware of? This is what we have to look forward to in spending on a national healthcare plan. Our fellow citizens using healthcare resources irrationally and then wanting to lay the blame at the alter of corporate greed, when it is plain old citizen irresponsibility and a lack of personal agency-otherwise known as pork barreling on the level of the lower classes with the expectation it be written off as ignorance, lack of common sense, or some other inept justification for not giving a rip about how the tax-payers money is spent-pork barreling poor is as vulgar as pork barreling wealthy in my book.