قالب وردپرس درنا توس
Home https://server7.kproxy.com/servlet/redirect.srv/sruj/smyrwpoii/p2/ US https://server7.kproxy.com/servlet/redirect.srv/sruj/smyrwpoii/p2/ US judge stops Trump HHS rule requires drug prices in TV ads

US judge stops Trump HHS rule requires drug prices in TV ads



President Donald Trump

Zach Gibson | Bloomberg | Getty Images

A federal judge on Monday blocked the Trump administration from implementing a new rule that would force pharmaceutical companies to include wholesale prices for their drugs in television commercials.

U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta in Washington, DC, is equated with drug makers Merck & Co, Eli Lilly and Co and Amgen by halting the US Department of Health and Human Services rule from coming into force on Tuesday as scheduled.

HHS Secretary Alex Azar announced the rule on May 8, saying that forcing drug addicts to publish their prices in direct advertising TV advertising could help reduce skyrocketing prescription drug costs if businesses were embarrassed or scared because they would scare away customers.

The rule was originally proposed in May last year as part of US President Donald Trump's "blueprint" to lower prescription drug costs to US consumers.

Under the rule, wholesale or list will be included if it is $ 35 or more for a month's supply or the usual treatment course. HHS said the 1

0 most commonly advertised drugs have list prices of $ 488 to $ 16,938 per month. Month or for a normal turnaround time.

Many drug abusers have opposed the rule. The largest industry lobbying company, Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA), said list prices could be confusing to patients and discourage them from seeking medical attention.

Merck, Eli Lilly and Amgen filed their lawsuit with the advertising industry grouping the National Advertisers Association on June 14, as the argument for confusing consumers will force them to disclose a price that is not relevant to patients with insurance .

Drugmakers have long argued that list prices do not reflect the actual cost of drugs they do not take into account discounts and discounts negotiated with health insurance companies and pharmacy benefit managers to ensure patient access to the drugs.

The case alleged that HHS did not have the power to issue the rule value and that it violated their right to freedom under the first amendment of the US Constitution.

The US Department of Justice defended the rule of court and said it met a standard US Supreme Co herb set in 1985 when it held the government may force advertisers to disclose actual, non-controversial information.


Source link