Teva as an Example of Corporate Morality?

The New York Times (Natasha Singer) had a piece today regarding Teva and and other generic manufacturers. The tone of the story is that Teva is a better company because of the frugality of its operations, and its focus on the bottom line. Several examples highlight how Teva shuns the idea of a corporate plane and always looks for an appearance of egalitarianism.


Needless to say generic manufacturers play an important role in the production and distribution of medications. What the article fails to highlight is that today’s generics were the branded medications of the past. Without a healthy pipeline of new drug development Teva’s role is nonexistent. A mention is made of how Teva can produce drugs cheaper because it did not invest in R&D. But very little context is provided.


For people who criticize “me too” drugs, they should remember that the generics are the ultimate “me too” and that generics have no innovation. So unless we all agree that today’s medicine is “as good as it gets” then we should cherish the value of discovery and innovation.


As we have many times before stated, this innovation, as it relates to drug discovery comes mostly from the private sector. Do you think our cancer treatments are good enough and sufficient? Should we give up on dementia, MS and stroke research? Should we just allow folks with diabetes to finish their lives early? If you answered no to any of the above questions then you get the point. Now if Teva invested in R&D maybe that would be a sweet combo. Don’t hold your breath until that happens in large scale.