Latest news with #ChrisMeekins
Yahoo
18-06-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Health policy expert: Expect a 'significant pushback' on attempts to curb pharma ad spend
US Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is reportedly working on a way to curb pharmaceutical advertising. Experts have long believed that an outright ban on the practice — the US is one of the only countries in the world to allow direct-to-consumer advertising — is unlikely to succeed in the courts. But RFK has his sights set on making it more expensive for the industry, which already reportedly spends more than $10 billion per year on advertising, according to a Bloomberg report. The exact plan is unclear, but there are several tools the federal government could use, according to one expert. Raymond James health policy analyst Chris Meekins, who previously worked at the US Health and Human Services Department (HHS), told Yahoo Finance that such a scheme could materially impact not only drug companies but also ad and media platforms. (See video above.) Some estimates show that 20% of all advertising dollars in the US are from the pharma industry, Meekins said. "It may not even be pharma suing, it may be television networks. Any type of ad placement entity that says they'll be harmed by this change, and that it's an inappropriate change, could sue and have standing to sue on this," he said. "I think there would be significant pushback," Meekins added, noting that pharma lobbying has a reputation for success over the years. In addition, previous attempts to outright ban advertising have not been able to make it through Congress. One bill recently introduced by Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Angus King (I-Maine) lacks bipartisan support, making it a nonstarter, Meekins said. Read more: Is health insurance tax-deductible? But how willing is the pharma industry to take on the Trump administration, given that it faces several battles, including the threat of tariffs? "Pharma doesn't want to go in an outright hot war with the president anytime soon," Meekins said. Big Pharma is fighting a multifront battle with the Feds. For one thing, the government might slow down drug approvals. There is also the threat of tariffs, plus the push to onshore manufacturing. Then there are the ongoing Medicare drug pricing negotiations and overall pressure on costs from Congress and the president. "Any time you're having that fight, there's a cost to your investors for doing it. Your multiple gets compressed, a couple terms at least, because a bunch of investors are going to say, 'I just don't want the headache on this,' or to have to make a policy bet," Meekins said. Anjalee Khemlani is the senior health reporter at Yahoo Finance, covering all things pharma, insurance, care services, digital health, PBMs, and health policy and politics. That includes GLP-1s, of course. Follow Anjalee as AnjKhem on social media platforms X, LinkedIn, and Bluesky @AnjKhem.
Axios
16-06-2025
- Business
- Axios
DOGE cuts cause FDA to delay decision on hereditary disease drug
The Food and Drug Administration will miss a deadline this week deciding whether to approve a drug for a potentially life-threatening disorder because of "heavy workload and limited resources," manufacturer KalVista Pharmaceuticals said. Why it matters: It appears to be the first time an FDA review had to be extended because of DOGE-directed cuts to staff at the agency. The big picture: Health industries pay billions developing and shepherding drugs, devices and tests through the regulatory process, including user fees that help ensure there's enough staff to evaluate products on a predictable timeline. Drug companies previously expressed concerns that the timeframes for these sorts of decisions would begin slipping because of staff and budget cuts. KalVista said the FDA notified the company it would miss its decision date of June 17 for a new drug application for the oral drug, called sebetralstat, that targets hereditary angioedema. The condition is a rare genetic disorder in which patients can experience experience painful and debilitating attacks of tissue swelling in various locations of the body that can be life-threatening. The agency did not request any additional data or studies or raise concerns about the drug, the company said. It indicated it expects to deliver a decision within approximately four weeks, the company said. What they're saying:"One delay does not a trend make," wrote Chris Meekins, a Raymond James analyst and health official in the first Trump administration.
Axios
12-05-2025
- Business
- Axios
Trump's executive order to lower drug prices may not do much of that
The White House's executive order to lower drug prices is largely an exercise in applying leverage, rather than actual policymaking — and it may not amount to much, experts said. The big picture: President Trump says his directive will dramatically reduce drug costs for U.S. consumers, and quickly. But there are few details as to how he plans to accomplish that. Instead, Trump appears to be adapting the playbook he's used on universities over Gaza protests: Threaten administrative actions that could be financially painful, set a deadline — in this case 30 days — and then see what happens. "It reminds us of how in President Trump's first term he was 'all bark, no bite' on drug pricing," Chris Meekins, an analyst at Raymond James, wrote in an investor note Monday. "We don't completely discount the possibility that the EO could eventually lead to some one-off deals, but the order itself is so vague that it's difficult to predict the exact impact it may have," Capital Alpha's Kim Monk wrote in a note. State of play: The order calls for drugmakers to voluntarily cut prices or face the threat of a "Most Favored Nation" pricing regime that would peg the cost of their medicines to what's paid in other wealthy nations, where they often sell for less. The timeline for the administration to actually secure lower drug prices is slippery. Trump posted on social media Sunday that American consumers would "almost immediately" see their drug prices fall by 30% to 80%. In reality, it would take much longer than that. The executive order gives administration officials 30 days to come up with new target drug prices and to communicate them to companies. If the companies don't agree to lower prices voluntarily, HHS will kick off a rulemaking process and other enforcement actions — all of which take considerable amounts of time. That includes actions such as certifying drug importations from other developed nations, increased anti-trust enforcement and the potential modification or loss of drug approvals. Yes, but: The order is almost certain to be challenged in court, just like a similar most favored nation policy for Medicare was during Trump's first term. "If people thought Harvard was well capitalized enough to fight back against Trump's lawsuits, wait until they see the drug industry," John Barkett, managing director at BRG and former senior policy advisor in the Biden White House. Trump's 2020 attempt to tie Medicare Part B drugs to the lowest price paid by other OECD countries was blocked by a federal judge after the drug industry sued. This time, the administration may be hampered by last year's Supreme Court decision that struck down the so-called Chevron deference and could limit executive branch agencies' ability to compel drugmakers to cut prices without action from Congress. Trump said during a press conference Monday that he spoke to the Republican leaders of the Senate and the House of Representatives about passing legislation to lower drug prices. But government price negotiation has historically been very unpopular with Republican lawmakers. Between the lines: The EO also calls for pushing other countries to increase what they pay for drugs to share the costs for biomedical innovation. It is unclear how the U.S. intends to push other countries to do that, although the economics would suggest that pushing prices down in the U.S. could drive up prices elsewhere, Yunan Ji, assistant professor of strategy in the business of health initiative at Georgetown's McDonough School of Business. Most favored nation pricing generally works better for smaller economies, Ji said. "When a really large economy factors prices against some smaller economies, that's going to affect the whole global equilibrium," Ji said. "So it's not certain that the US will actually save money. It could but it's going to set off a whole lot of reshuffling because the European contracts will have to be renegotiated." Reality check: The pharmaceutical industry doesn't seem excessively worried. "The Administration is right to use trade negotiations to force foreign governments to pay their fair share for medicines. U.S. patients should not foot the bill for global innovation," PhRMA CEO and president Stephen Ubl said in a statement. Still, industry leaders warned against the dangers of "importing foreign price controls." The intrigue: Given all the uncertainty, some are speculating the order may do little more than distract from the grinding Medicaid debate in Congress.
