This is the best, high level explanation about what the diabetics have been up to with policy. They don’t even use the words, “PBM,” or “UHG.”
Now, its important to recognize that this effort will succeed. It’s a bipartisan effort developed over many years and the incoming administration has signaled support in no uncertain terms.
I find the video incredibly annoying; it is marketed as an “interview” but it isn’t. It doesn’t give Khan a real opportunity to speak. It takes small segments of what might be an interview (but the question asked always seems to be missing) with the presentation of the pundit; the talking face.
These are real issues and they are about the rising predominance of monopolies; diabetes is a side effect as is every other part of our existence that is exploited. The argument is not well presented for me, in fact I might even go out and think the opposite (but I don’t).
Anyway, Khan is DITW at this point. Would the president elect agree? (Regardless of who he is.)
The question is not what is, it is, “What will be?”
The answer, of course, is, “What we voted for.”
Ahhhh, darn it. Well, thanks for the feedback.
I thought it was better to have a super high level explination.
What I didn’t like about it was that it gets a little partisan and politic-y. That turns people off. What I did like about it was that they touched on the intersection with medical devices…you don’t often hear that side of it until your deep into the topic.
You might already know this, but the companies were inappropriately listing medical devices as traditional drugs in their drug orange book. That’s how they were inappropriately extending patents on super old drugs. That created a BUNCH of movement now on patent legislation. FDA never noticed that stuff until FTC notified them. That’s a pretty big deal now. They gloss over it a bit, but its nice to see clearly the “strap” on the inhaler that people reference. That part blew my mind because I felt like I could really see that companies were intentionally defrauding.
The best links I have for this are hard to access on this platform, but there are solid signs of support. A lot of those signs from the GOP partisans is coming by way of the small biz pharmacists because its easier to make an argument for small business with GOP partisans. But they always say, “small pharmacists AND patients.” So, where the DFL leads with patients, the GOP is going to differentiate themselves slightly politically by leading with the pharmacists. That should all work out fine. Let me try to find a couple links for ya.
SOURCE #1. We see Trump mention this issue twice in one week after the shooting when the entire internet went into rebellion over healthcare costs. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S6_ie3EnTYw
See min 28 - Pfizer and Lilly are sitting right next to him when he’s making these statements. They are helping to fund the effort to bring down the PBMs because it was always gonna be either them or the PBMs first to the guillotine.
See min 30 - PBMs
The diabetics have billboards all over DC. The PBMs aren’t going down quietly, and we start seeing complaints about them from GOP staffers on the hill.
SOURCE #2. https://www.bizpacreview.com/2024/12/16/pbms-seek-to-undermine-trump-with-misinformation-about-end-of-year-health-package-1509964/
SOURCE #3. Show the link with recent press statements from the new admin promoting action related to the small biz pharmacists. Can’t find it. How about this? This is the bill that I think they will likely start selling PBM legislation in addition to the FTC case (although that is an almost sure thing). RELEASE: AUCHINCLOSS INTRODUCES BIPARTISAN PHARMACISTS FIGHT BACK ACT TO CRACK DOWN ON PREDATORY DRUG PRICING | U.S. Congressman Jake Auchincloss Of Massachusetts 4th District
There are 2 bill sponsors - a republican from KY and a democrat from MA. But this is how the Republicans will sell PBM reform and take credit (as a party) and differentiate themselves from the DFL (because parties always do that).
Here’s the pharmacists talking about it with the member from MA if you prefer audio summary: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jYO8dgrpozQ
SOURCE #4. If you want super detail, just read Scott’s page. He’s been working on this for 20 years and he knows more than anyone. Scott's Web Log: The FTC Sues the Big 3 PBMs, but Pharma Could Face a Similar Fate Soon
Alternatively, here’s Scott on Juicebox if you want your summary while your cooking dinner: #1224 Orange Book Chronicles - Juicebox Podcast: Type 1 Diabetes - Apple Podcasts
Why does it always look like such a ■■■■ storm whenever I try to answer a simple question lately?!?!?!?!?!
QUICK ANSWER:
FTC is going to succeed in suing the PBMs. Part of why we know that is true is because they filed in administrative court, not a normal federal court in front of federal judges (which can be more risky). The downside is that their enforcement action will be limited. They can’t, for instance, sue for monetary damages. The best they will be able to do when they win, is issue a cease and desist order to the PBMs. This gets completed in 2 years (approximately).
They will ALSO run some new legislation this session, in addition to the FTC case, to regulate PBMs. I don’t know if that moves faster than 2 years. It might, but its all still in the House and has been parked there since at least last May. They are under huge pressure to move this legislation fast. Both parties are on board. They have everything they need to move forward. Only thing that might slow it down is partisan bickering. I believe the first bill to move will be (the one linked to in source #3 above) The Pharmacists Fight Back Act. We have a million bills brought by a million different legislators (all in the house still), I’m just guessing this one moves first because its easy to GOP partisan to sell. It has the right marketing for the GOP. Its a classical “support small biz” argument. That’s easy for them to sell.
As usual, thank you, thank you, for all the great info–including Scott’s interest–another member I have greatly valued and lost track of! Delighted. Best regards to you. As ever…Judith
I’ve got fires burning all over the place. If anybody has time and can use the Wayback machine to obtain what conversation was taking place between Docs on the Redditt thread (before the mods deleted it), it might be helpful. I keep pushing it off. Reddit Mods Delete Doctors Slamming Insurance Industry After CEO's Murder
Don’t post it publicly. They prob deleted it for a reason.
Docs are communicating and sending me stuff to read to help me understand how the provider side of the system is operating and feeling. I’m gonna need a good block of time to sit down w/ material. I don’t understand what’s happening with/to the Docs.
Patients helped bring antitrust to the FTC. Pharmacists are legislating. What are the Docs up to? They are suspiciously absent. Maybe they are up to something and I just don’t know about it.
I agree with all you are saying, of course I will also criticise it because criticism and argument is how we learn. But your Reddit comment caught me off guard and then a different fire led me to an observation which may not seem to be on topic but is:
https://ccnmtl.columbia.edu/projects/mmt/mxp/speeches/mxt17.html
The curious, critical, punch is in the last line, the last paragraph, but we are T1s so I think we might laugh too.
No politics, just πολιτικά.
Before I forget and go down your rabbit hole.
Here’s the pharmacists today: Lawmakers Plot to Force Health Insurers to Sell Off Pharmacies - WSJ
Here’s what the Docs say that they are up to (its 90 pages long), but the important thing is to know that they are up to something:
report (1).pdf (2.4 MB)
PBMs are the worst problem. Second only to the lack of a cure for T1D.
And they should not use the word “diabetic” to refer to a human being. NIH has directed medical professionals never to use this term because it has extensive data showing that individuals called “diabetic” to their face have worse physical health outcomes than those who are not. Person first. Person with diabetes.
I like the movement I’m seeing, snooping around the Doctors. I’ve been goading them a little bit, but they have people and resources. They just need to talk amongst one another and they will develop better infrastructure to implement effective policy as a group. I think they have got what it takes to move the ball down the field when the time is right. 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xBkRCd2UCLI