Own in my last post I wrote, once again, about the "oddities" concerning the pharmaceutical industries and their overwhelming power. I explained how two exactly the same products, just because one is used by the ophthalmologist and one by the ENT, have very different costs. Even more strange is the fact that the one with the lowest cost, the eye drops, has a greater sterilization system which should increase the price.
Domenico de Felice's blog – Il Fatto Quotidiano – 17 May 2019
That's right in these days we discover that the pharmaceutical malfeasance involves some well-known manufacturers of genericswho have inflated the prices of more than a hundred drugs up to 1000%. Prosecutors in 44 US states have sued several pharmaceutical companies, including Teva, Pfizer, Novartis and Mylan. 
According to the allegations they built a real cartel agreement. I am still reminded of the cartel agreement between Novartis And Roche which still allows the use of Lucentis in the place of Avastin with an enormous and useless expense, which not even the new Minister of Health Giulia Grillo has changed. Other than change! They still come to mind as expensive drugs antidiabetics withdrawn from the market in other European countries due to their dangerousness, are still on sale here with the Sanitary system. Other than change, Dr. Grillo!
But to put even more meat on the fire (will the minister wake up?) I found out how the difference in cost, with the same active ingredient, also manifests itself for the therapies of our animalsdomestic. Thus we discover that an antibiotic for human use, Augmentin 12 tablets from one gram, costs 10.20 euros, but if it becomes for veterinary use, Synulox Vet 500 milligrams, the dosage is halved and increased 
enormously the cost at 28.32 euros. Or a cortisone for human use, Medrol 30 tablets of 4 milligrams which costs 8.20 euros, becomes Medrol veterinarian, which with the same number and dosage costs 16.20 euros. Costs raised unnecessarily, given the absolute equivalence.
Giulia Grillo, we still have the opportunity to throw money at healthcare to make them earn to the pharmaceutical industries, accomplices the doctors of humans and animals? Giulia Grillo, would you like to intervene and ask doctors for guidance on the dangers of pharmaceutical industry products, which obviously cost much more than well-known drugs both in terms of therapeutic efficacy and complications? Giulia Grillo, because she doesn't intercede with Aifa? Giulia Grillo, let's change before or after European elections? Are we sure about the change? Are we sure we only want to look at the next elections and not at the next generations? For now I think you should go to an honest and careful ophthalmologist to see further.
Every now and then someone wakes up and decides to attack me ??♀
The latest in the series even targeted me because I wouldn't have done anything against Big Pharma's excessive power.
Here, the facts are quite different and I limit myself to pointing out just a couple of initiatives that my staff and I have carried out with great commitment.
We have managed to close the payback affair after 7 years, forcing pharmaceutical companies to pay 2.5 billion euros which will end up in the state coffers and on Monday 22 we will present a resolution to the World Health Organization to ask all the countries of the world to demand transparency in drug price negotiations, thus guaranteeing more fairness and less discretion on the part of producers who can now make good and bad times on the price of medicines.
These are the facts. The rest is pure personal attack which certainly clashes with the numerous requests for a meeting received by the author of the article
Ed: Dear Minister Grillo, while you're at it, take a look at the state of scientific information on the drug. You will know that the matter is regulated by Legislative Decree 219/06, systematically unnoticed. So unnoticed that Farmindustria and the Unions have set up a "technical table" to establish whether it is appropriate for the CCNL to observe the law in force since 2006. Who actually checks whether the ISF depend on the Scientific Service and not on Marketing, as required by law? Then there are a myriad of non-ISF figures 
who make more or less scientific information with the sole purpose of "selling" at any cost. There is the question of the contracts with which the ISFs are hired, mostly paid commissions on "sales", then there are the multifirm ISFs, a type of contract that should be authorized by the Ministry of Health, after the approval of AIFA . We do not know that the ministry you lead has issued authorizations of this type.
We understand that in the face of the very serious health problems it has to face, the problem of the ISF may appear of little importance. But is not so. Scientific Representatives (the real ones) represent a continuous and irreplaceable source of news for the doctor. Each individual informant is, in relation to his own sector, an expert capable of reporting to the doctor all the baggage of experience relating to the specialties covered by his activity. His work is aimed at making doctors aware of the characteristics and properties of medicines, in order to ensure their correct use in the exclusive interest of patients.
It is also the duty of the Scientific Pharmaceutical Representative to report to the Head of the Scientific Service, on whom he depends, and to the company's Pharmacovigilance Department, all observations on medicinal products reported by healthcare professionals (art. 122 And 126 of Legislative Decree 219/06). This flow of information contributes decisively to ensuring the correct use of the drug in therapy, providing useful information for the development of research.
The NHS certainly cannot afford to tolerate information manipulations that alter "healthy" competition in the pharmaceutical sector (which must be based on quality and price) by increasing waste and therefore, ultimately, harming all of us, as citizens and potential users of the service.
The ISF is a very delicate figure and due to its function it should be fully included among the health professions. A figure of the ISF outlined in this way needs rigorous control which can only be exercised by a specific professional order placed "under the high supervision of the Ministry of Health" which on the one hand protects the Members and on the other, precisely through the defense of professionalism, protect the community.
