Some people swear that these compounds work.Maybe they do but not at these crazy prices.This reminds me of the $500.00 hammers and the nuty cost of toilet seats the Government paid years ago this is just another scam to rip off the government and the tax payer.Open your eyes people.

Many compound Rx Pharmacies are charging Tricare pretty High Rates for compound creams. And Tricare seems to be paying close to the rates they are billed.

Are the compound companies charging Tricare such high rates in anticipation of Tricare instituting "Caps" in 2014? Are they trying to "grab high profits while the going is "Good"?

Signed,

a disgusted person holding a Tricare EOB. I will not diclose the amount Tricare paid for this compound pain cream directed by the phx to check off a formulation. But it better be a "$10,000. oo mistake.

BYW
tricare is fighting in my case over lidocaine - you know that crazy habit forming drug ! and the point is beyond what tricare will and wont pay for this effects everyone
http://www.mymedsmatter.com/animal-health-and-s959
An amendment may soon be offered on the Senate Floor ...
...that would limit available treatment options from compounded medications for dogs, cats and horses. The amendment is expected to be offered to S.959, legislation that is supposed to address the tragic situation in which a rouge pharmacy acted like a manufacturer and violated numerous laws, resulting in the death of many people and making even more gravely ill. But the Animal Health Institute (AHI), an organization created and funding by the big drug companies, is apparently trying to use this tragedy to eliminate competition and treatment options at the expense of our beloved pets.

The amendment that will soon be offered targets the availability of customized medications that a veterinarian believes is in the best interest of family pets and horses. These important treatment options entail making specialized drugs from active pharmaceutical ingredients in a precise dosage amount, or in a form that a veterinarian believes would increase compliance and the ease of administration. For example, a bitter tablet might be altered to a flavored powder that can be sprinkled on food, or a pill a pet refuses to swallow might be converted to a cream that can be rubbed onto the animal’s skin). Your pet gets the treatment it needs and deserves, but the drug companies do not get the profits they seem to think they are entitled to get.

The amendment was temporarily pulled from S.959 when it was approved on May 22, 2013 by the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions. But as a lobbyist for AHI was recently quoted in a trade journal, ““We hope our absence from the bill is temporary.”

As published in an earlier draft of S.959 the proposal would do the following:

Veterinarians would be limited to the compounded medications they can prescribe to a list of bulk ingredients that are on a positive list created by the FDA. Elephants, giraffes, hamsters and other “minor species” would not be limited. This would be the first time that a medical provider (veterinarians) and a group of patients (dogs, cats and horses) would be limited to treatment options to a positive list developed by the federal government. It also would stifle innovation, as any new treatments could not be considered, as they would obviously not be included on the positive list.
The amendment would eliminate or drastically restrict the availability of compounded medications that are regularly stocked in veterinary offices for emergency or routine usage. This could delay or prevent treatment necessary to keep pets alive and healthy.
The FDA is given expanded new authority to classify variations of drug company products, which is the very definition of compounded medications, as illegal copies, further threatening treatment options. Veterinarians would still be able to prescribe some of these therapies under a limited exception contained in the bill, but FDA could impose new regulations and limitations that could make this difficult.
There is no legitimate medical reason to limit the treatment options for dogs, cats and horses while these same options would be available for zoo animals and other exotic pets. Yes, we want elephants and panda bears to live a long time. But we also want our family pets and horses to enjoy the same treatments to help them survive and stay healthy. An older dog, cat or horse can suffer from conditions such as diabetes, cancer and rheumatism. We need our veterinarians to have all the options they need at their disposal to give them the best care possible.

While this proposal is highly restrictive, it may not be enough to satisfy the Animal Health Institute. The same lobbyist quoted above talked about his disappointment with the “permissiveness” of the proposals listed above. Apparently it didn’t eliminate treatment options for dogs, cats and horses quickly enough. Send them a message by letting your Senator and Congressman that it’s the proposal of the Animal Health Institute that should be eliminated. Act now.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jul/5/how-to-make-a-300-drug-cost-30000/#ixzz2YC7CKa93

VETS ( animal vets ) Office use of compounded medications is critical to effective patient care in many settings. While emergency-use preparations are most widely recognized, prescribers in many specialties rely on office use to treat their patients, even when office administration is not necessary but treatment must begin immediately.

But Senate Bill 959, which is scheduled to come to a full-Senate vote during the week of July 15, would dramatically reduce your ability to order compounded preparations for office use. Although the bill is named for compounding for human health, there are two reasons it should matter to you as a veterinarian:
Animal health provisions are being prepared to insert as an amendment to the bill when it comes to the Senate floor for a vote next week.

If Federal legislation passes to prohibit ordering for office use in human health, it is likely that the individual states will treat animal health in the same way they treat human-health prescriptions.
Please take action today. Enter your email address and ZIP code to the right and click “continue.” Enter the additional information requested. Then, to the left on the same screen, customize the sample message. When you’re finished, click “send message” and it will be sent automatically to your Congressional representatives in the Senate and House. It will take just a few minutes of your time today to prevent an unconscionable and unworkable interruption of your practice and your patients’ health if S. 959 survives.

http://www.mymedsmatter.com/how-s959-will-affect-access-bhrt

Legislation Passed by the U.S. Senate HELP Committee Could Put Your BHRT At Risk–Again.
On May 22, 2013 the U.S. Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) passed a bill, S.959 that contains provisions that threaten access to compounded Bioidentical Hormone Replacement Therapy (BHRT) by both patients and providers. The entire Senate could consider the bill as early as late June 2013.

This bill would give the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) broad and unprecedented powers to regulate compounding pharmacy, including the power to reduce or eliminate access to certain compounded medications used for BHRT. Here is a description of the main provisions of this legislation:

S.959 grants FDA the authority ban certain components of compounded BHRT if, in the opinion of the FDA, they pose “public health concerns.” In 2008, FDA took similar action against the female hormone estriol, a component contained in approximately 80 percent of all compounded estrogens. FDA’s action was in direct response to a request in a “Citizen Petition” filed by a drug company with synthetic hormones that competed with BHRT. FDA instituted import bans on estriol and sent warning letters to suppliers and pharmacies trying to prevent or limit women from obtaining BHRT with estriol. FDA was unable to enforce these actions. S.959 gives them that authority.

S.959 greatly expands the definition of a “copy” of a drug company product to include a “variation.” FDA is given expansive authority to determine the definition of variation, and would have the power to determine that compounded BHRT medications are copies of one-size-fits-all and synthetic hormones manufactured by drug companies. This could turn compounded BHRT into an illegal copy of a drug company product.

While there is an exception that allows a provider to continue to write prescriptions for the now illegal BHRT, under S.959 he or she would have to determine that BHRT produces a “clinic difference” in a patient’s treatment outcome as opposed to using the drug company product. While a doctor would be able to make this determination, the bill would allow the FDA to determine compliance.

In the past, FDA attempted to require practitioners to file costly and invasive Investigative New Drug applications (INDs) for certain compounded BHRT. The agency refused to recognize the considerable expense and bureaucratic procedures involved in setting up and IND. Instead, FDA dismissed legitimate concerns as “misconceptions that obtaining an IND is costly, cumbersome, and time consuming process.” A requirement for an IND for such commonly used medication is an unwarranted intrusion of federal bureaucrats into the patient/provider relationship. But it would be allowed under S.959.

For men, compounded testosterone therapy (both injectable versions and creams) could be determined to be copies of manufactured products. Even if a provider can justify a clinic difference in outcomes, S.959 would allow FDA to erect barriers to the prescribing of these medications.

FDA has demonstrated hostility towards BHRT in the past, and on its website it still has a consumer alert stating, “’BHRT’ is a marketing term not recognized by FDA.” In the same alert, which was specifically requested by the drug company filing the Citizen Petition mentioned about, FDA denies the scientific fact that bioidentical hormones are identical to hormones made by the body. With such contempt toward BHRT, giving FDA broad and sweeping powers over patient and provider access to these medications, as is contained in S.959, is frightening.

Compounding pharmacies are to Pharma what alternative medicine is to Medicine. This is all part of the same effort to squash competition that would provide individualized, truly science based care and that is outside of large corporate control.

Tricare members should call Express Scripts at the number above as well as senator Levin, chairman of the armed forces senate committee (202) 224-3871. Express scripts does not do anything without the directive from the military. There are ways to control the costs of this benefit by limiting the amount they are willing to pay for a compounded Rx (many commercial plans do this already) vs eliminating the coverage entirely. Our military families do deserve better! Tricare will also set precedence for other insurers. I would encourage everyone who sees the value in compounding medications to speak out and contact Levin's office.

Nystatin if an antifungal drug - and fungus loves sugar. So a diet that has a low carb count and the esp means "Sugar"

Good gosh!

That is a problem with some of the seizure meds too. Generic means - I thought the exact same stuff and measurements -- but I found out that it is not the same - that the amounts of the seizure drug can be off by a lot.

Is this what the public is going to have to fight forever more?

Kentucky finally did make a law that just because there is a generic drug - does not mean a patient with eplipsy has to use it.

But it does not matter now does it -- the insurance companies will get out of it - in other ways too.

I am beginning to think that the force that help write Obama Care was the health insurance companies. Since it has gone into affect - my bill each month I pay out for myself and my son had gone up 30 dollars extra a month.

When my son smashed his finger between a cattle loader and cattle hauler this spring and had to have stitches -- the insurance company paid a whopping 100 dollars -- I paid the other 700.

WHy in the heck would a smashed finger, and few stitches call for 800 dollars to fix anyway?

Shocking same here in the UK big banner welcome home lads..after that the heroes are hung out to dry...shocking!!

We just got a letter from our healthcare provider (United Healthcare) saying the they will no longer cover any portion of the cost of B12 shots from compounding pharmacies b/c its not FDA approved.

the number is 1-877-363-1303