Copyright 2000 The New York Times Company
The New
York Times
View Related Topics
August 2, 2000, Wednesday, Late Edition -
Final
SECTION: Section A; Page 24; Column
6; Editorial Desk
LENGTH: 175 words
HEADLINE: Prescription Drug Pool
BODY:
To the Editor:
Your July 26
editorial "Driving Up Drug Prices" urges a case-by-case approach to the complex
questions surrounding patent laws, food and drug laws, and competition policy
expressed in the Hatch-Waxman Act. You then suggest that Andrx
Pharmaceuticals intended to delay generic competition by entering into an
agreement in connection with its continuing patent infringement litigation. We
did not, and in fact, as a result of the agreement, consumers got Andrx's
lower-priced generic product faster than they would have otherwise.
Andrx is doing everything it can to achieve the objectives of the
Hatch-Waxman Act, including spending millions of dollars annually in litigation
to determine whether it has the right to get its lower-priced products to
consumers notwithstanding the brand's patents. To solve the real problem, the
law needs to reduce the risks faced by marketing a generic while patent
litigation is continuing.
SCOTT LODIN
General Counsel
Andrx Pharmaceuticals
Fort Lauderdale, Fla., July 27, 2000
http://www.nytimes.com
LOAD-DATE: August 2,
2000 
