You're watching...
FNC senior medical contributor Dr. Marc Siegel and FNC legal analyst Lis Wiehl on the record fine against GlaxoSmithKline and how the health-care law ...
Also in this playlist...
Auto-advance: ON
Auto-advance
This transcript is automatically generated
Or health care fraud settlement as well as new concerns over the cost of Medicaid expansion under Obama -- we're joined back.
But he's senior medical contributor doctor Marc Siegel and former prosecutor -- is legal and at least mail welcome to you both -- -- a lot of disincentive.
-- put some perspective this ruling against -- GlaxoSmithKline it's three billion dollars which is historically high.
-- -- -- That's an enormous amount of money except that for them it really isn't and this is kind of like make this go away money and I'm actually quite concerned about this for one reason you mentioned the three drugs involved of India -- that was a big deal because a lot of a lot of patients were on this drug for diabetes.
They knew that there was problems with -- -- could cause heart problems be related to heart problems and they didn't report this data right away that's a huge problem.
You know we use drugs a lot for what we call off label uses.
I as a practicing physician may interest me know -- to prescribe and when not I might not always pay attention to what the FDA on label uses are.
But other doctors -- And so if if if they're busy using well future for weight loss that's not what it's supposed to be used for it can cause seizures you know that the compact so you don't wanna be giving that to children if it hasn't been a -- -- study without -- -- Bother -- that these companies can buy themselves out.
Really criminal.
Liability here I mean they've made a cost benefit analysis we're gonna keep selling the stuff we're gonna keep pushing up the public.
When they shouldn't have been when they knew like -- to remember that years ago.
They have the smoking gun up we knew these cars would explode just like that we know what's gonna happen and they still push for drugs.
And they just now by themselves out that we need new las nearby nations but isn't that -- -- or less business -- so much regulation getting in the way as every time I think build it's that it got to be -- to -- something here because on that I thought.
I don't government but I gotta finish yeah took the words I don't know -- -- militias who is the expert on this not me but I am so glad to hear her say this because I feel that it's either criminal or it's not correct if it's criminal.
Let's prosecuted as -- criminal.
This is something where you can but you can you know you -- a kidney stone.
I went out they can't really think and it it -- -- yet but certain point to say.
Look companies you've got to be responsible and if your not your criminally liable and that that means you're CEO goes to jail -- Seale was thought to single note this is not unprecedented there was the -- ruling right and don't you as a patient as an individual just have to take as much responsibility for your own health and later to put more solidity to hold everybody.
-- -- Important because look personally writer despises been involved in this with several drug companies have had this problem but you -- as a patient.
A patient -- -- informed this is a gray area where your physician.
Would have to inform you.
What -- proper use of the mitigation -- patients are victims of wrong information like and I.
And I do say and I do say the position as a responsibility to know the right indication whether the drug companies saying it or not but not how I -- positions are gonna do that.
And -- exactly and every -- and if you assume that it's going to be fun because it's it's being -- out there.
But I'm not -- not not a doctor.
But wouldn't you think he would just to okay their tongue it's fine with -- -- with -- many until someone like ice for thousands of doctors would not -- underneath the -- right and they would follow -- sympathetic to prop all right so let's talk about the day's news on obamacare so the Wall Street Journal Steve Morse the chief economics reporter basically saying you know what it is the middle class it's gonna have to bear the burden of these.
And he was very funny whatever you wanna call them tax tag line mandate but -- -- the president promises no new taxes on the middle class it's really.
It's it's really concerning and it's just grows more troubling by -- daily Sally yes well added they're now they're backing off its not a tax it's a penalty -- -- it -- look.
We would go on this you know it's -- -- circle if you will for many times over and over.
It any attacks I mean it is attacked and that they've got -- finally say it's attacks but where do we go from here I mean are there legal challenges.
The Supreme Court is that -- of the court I mean that's it adolescents repeal or change that's it the president doctor Siegel said.
You will be able to keep your insurance.
Of.
Course you won't be able to first of all your.
Your position maybe joining a hospital in May be joining a group you know the biggest -- in the middle class is the rising premiums -- would come.
When we go to cover everyone with pre existing conditions and of course this penalty slash -- -- -- seven dollars a year so the middle class is gonna get a restrictions services they're not gonna get the same -- they're used to.
They're physician may no longer take the insurance -- -- but you could talk and then and they may actually.
Not limited time for you anymore so therefore -- a lot of what you're saying -- to some -- get this right up to you -- in the same card but -- insurance you pat.
-- 20142013.
And they will say no we do not take that anymore absolutely that's already happening in advance of Obama you're really coming in 2014.
Many and many physicians are dropping out and the Medicaid expansion.
Almost 50% of doctors already don't take -- -- Well now let me Canada -- exactly is a victory for State's Medicaid into because they can't get penalized or not by the -- -- exactly that's that's an optional thing and still is not so I think seven to two that supreme court's about optional you cannot force states.
To opt into Medicaid.
That's us that you can't force of state opted to a federal program so they're still that's still fine.
-- at one point in the medical environment has not been giving out there which is you know we all know that many of our states are going bankrupt.
And they're saying well the feds are gonna cover almost a 100% of the cost they're not telling you.
But they're not covering the administrative costs and -- over a billion dollars in some states.
To administer the increase in at about billion dollars per state your son that's right up almost a big New York State that it was estimated -- would cost one billion dollars to listen mr.
In the increase in Medicaid patients so you may not have to pay the bill for -- -- rank you have to pay the amount that equipment.
It was a unit that have to pay it believed -- then result of this well that was -- -- -- we have to -- -- states can't afford me the expansion so even -- defense what most of what may happen as the states is -- -- opt out of Medicaid completely and that's -- Florida saying you know that's that -- -- New Jersey right.
Well senator I like representatives asking if -- governors to oppose the implementation of the state -- parents and they make completely back off that is being the states and they can legally.
Under this decision thank you so much for this discussion covered a lot of ground -- and lively and the end of the day moving in because the deal and that they seek -- thank you -- my.
