Not Hacker News Logo

Not

Hacker

News!

Home
Hiring
Products
Companies
Discussion
Q&A
Users
Not Hacker News Logo

Not

Hacker

News!

AI-observed conversations & context

Daily AI-observed summaries, trends, and audience signals pulled from Hacker News so you can see the conversation before it hits your feed.

LiveBeta

Explore

  • Home
  • Hiring
  • Products
  • Companies
  • Discussion
  • Q&A

Resources

  • Visit Hacker News
  • HN API
  • Modal cronjobs
  • Meta Llama

Briefings

Inbox recaps on the loudest debates & under-the-radar launches.

Connect

© 2025 Not Hacker News! — independent Hacker News companion.

Not affiliated with Hacker News or Y Combinator. We simply enrich the public API with analytics.

Not Hacker News Logo

Not

Hacker

News!

Home
Hiring
Products
Companies
Discussion
Q&A
Users
  1. Home
  2. /Discussion
  3. /Novo Nordisk's Canadian Mistake
  1. Home
  2. /Discussion
  3. /Novo Nordisk's Canadian Mistake
Last activity about 1 month agoPosted Oct 19, 2025 at 4:39 PM EDT

Novo Nordisk's Canadian Mistake

jbm
423 points
232 comments

Mood

heated

Sentiment

mixed

Category

other

Key topics

Pharmaceuticals
Patent Law
Healthcare
Debate intensity80/100

Novo Nordisk's failure to maintain a Canadian patent for semaglutide (Ozempic) has sparked discussion about generic production and international drug pricing, with some seeing it as a business blunder and others as an opportunity for more affordable healthcare.

Snapshot generated from the HN discussion

Discussion Activity

Very active discussion

First comment

45m

Peak period

153

Day 1

Avg / period

53.3

Comment distribution160 data points
Loading chart...

Based on 160 loaded comments

Key moments

  1. 01Story posted

    Oct 19, 2025 at 4:39 PM EDT

    about 1 month ago

    Step 01
  2. 02First comment

    Oct 19, 2025 at 5:23 PM EDT

    45m after posting

    Step 02
  3. 03Peak activity

    153 comments in Day 1

    Hottest window of the conversation

    Step 03
  4. 04Latest activity

    Oct 21, 2025 at 7:45 PM EDT

    about 1 month ago

    Step 04

Generating AI Summary...

Analyzing up to 500 comments to identify key contributors and discussion patterns

Discussion (232 comments)
Showing 160 comments of 232
paulpauper
about 1 month ago
4 replies
So would it be possible to buy the drug in Canada and ship to US?
jasongill
about 1 month ago
1 reply
not legally, but anything is possible
OutOfHere
about 1 month ago
1 reply
There is nothing illegal about it. People get medicines from abroad all the time that are not generic domestically. It's not a controlled substance. One might have to go through unofficial channels though. In fact, I know people domestically who already get it cheaply from elsewhere abroad.
js2
about 1 month ago
1 reply
> In most circumstances, it is illegal for individuals to import drugs or devices into the U.S. for personal use because these products purchased from other countries often have not been approved by the FDA for use and sale in the U.S.

https://www.fda.gov/industry/import-basics/personal-importat...

OutOfHere
about 1 month ago
1 reply
There are a million laws on the books that not only are not enforced, but aren't even self consistent with each other. It is enforcement that determines what one actually can or can't do. The enforcement exists for controlled substances, for resale, and for a supply of over 90 days. For personal non-commercial use of a non-controlled medicine for under 90 days, the law is not enforced, and for good reason. People would die if the law were to be enforced too strictly.
tredre3
about 1 month ago
1 reply
> There are a million laws on the books that not only are not enforced, but aren't even self consistent with each other. It is enforcement that determines what one actually can or can't do.

Okay but your statement was that there's "nothing illegal about it". You now agree that it's illegal, you're just unlikely to get caught. And if you are, you'll just lose that purchase and not face any legal consequences.

OutOfHere
about 1 month ago
1 reply
It's not about getting caught. It's done in the open with full awareness of everyone. It's not like anyone is hiding it.

Afaik, people hide it only for some controlled substances.

Next time you play a random music video on YouTube, please look at the number of federal copyright laws you're violating. Also, if you ever drive from one state to another, check if you have any plant food with you because crossing state lines with any plant material may be illegal. And I need not remind of marijuana which we know remains highly illegal at the federal level.

kelnos
about 1 month ago
1 reply
You seem to be missing the point. You said, "there is nothing illegal about it".

That's false: it is entirely illegal.

Whether or not you can get away with it due to lax enforcement, or whether or not there are any real penalties for getting caught... that's a separate issue that has nothing to do with what you said.

OutOfHere
about 1 month ago
When the diversity of laws are not even logically self-consistent, with one law denying a right and the other permitting it, what defines what is legal and what isn't? Enforcement does.

Additionally, some laws are not even written clearly, and in fact are intentionally written vaguely.

rootusrootus
about 1 month ago
I think you may need to drive it across, not ship it, and the quantity limit is a 90 day supply. For people who live close enough to the border, it might be worth it.
Hilift
about 1 month ago
Possible, but considering that US Ozempic revenue is $10 billion per year between only Medicaid and Medicare, that would attract customs attention. The US market was projected to increase to $58 billion by 2035.
dlcarrier
about 1 month ago
Smuggling aside, they generally won't make it through customs: https://www.help.cbp.gov/s/article/Article-1815?language=en_...
pedalpete
about 1 month ago
9 replies
I thought I had a decent handle on patent law, but maybe I'm missing something here.

Yes, the patent won't be valid for Canada, but you can't import a product into the US which would infringe on a US patent.

So, though there may be a small amount that would slip through the cracks, it isn't as if anyone in the US can now manufacture Semaglutide and distribute it.

Canada is such a small market, that many companies don't bother. Though, for the cost, it seems ridiculous a company as big as Novo didn't pay the $500...that may even have been in Canadian dollars. :)

killingtime74
about 1 month ago
2 replies
Don't worry about the law think about the practical impact. It's now completely legal to ignore the patent in Canada so the price in Canada will plummet.

Canadian pharmacies can legally sell it and Americans (and all other foreigners for that matter) traveling there can legally buy it.

Unlike the criminal law, Novo nordisk would have to go after every single person individually and make the case that they are infringing the American patent. This is all without the help of the police or customs, as a private civil matter.

Obviously this would be uneconomic for Novo Nordisk. You can't search anyone as you don't have any warrants, as it's not a crime and then even if you could, you need to prove that the drugs they have on them were purchased in Canada.

Foreigners who currently pay a huge amount of money would only have to make one trip to Canada in however long period it takes for the drugs to expire. I know I would certainly make a day trip if I was using this drug.

Intellectual property law firms offer services to renew and watch registrations like this worldwide and it would have been very simple to have a contract with one of them.

tavavex
about 1 month ago
3 replies
> Canadian pharmacies can legally sell it and Americans (and all other foreigners for that matter) traveling there can legally buy it.

Well, about that... Aren't all variants of medications like these prescription-only? And in Canada you can't fill a foreign prescription without having a local doctor sign off on it, as far as I know.

JumpCrisscross
about 1 month ago
1 reply
> you can't fill a foreign prescription without having a local doctor sign off on it

This is how medical tourism typically works.

sbrother
about 1 month ago
1 reply
Is that process that can happen online? Or does it require the patient being physically present in Canada?
barbazoo
about 1 month ago
Can be done virtually but you might have to use a VPN or even lie about your place of residence.
petesergeant
about 1 month ago
Plenty of countries where having a doctor in the pharmacy is common practice. Buy some retail space in YYZ and you're set...
Marsymars
about 1 month ago
Depends on province. From my best reading, pharmacists in Alberta with prescribing authority can directly prescribe all schedule 1 drugs themselves.
labcomputer
about 1 month ago
1 reply
> Unlike the criminal law, Novo nordisk would have to go after every single person individually and make the case that they are infringing the American patent. This is all without the help of the police or customs, as a private civil matter.

I don't think that's quite right. One of the things that CBP does is inspect incoming shipments, and confiscate IP-infringing things.

Think about the recent Apple Watch SpO2 sensor patent shenanigans: The threat was to have CBP confiscate any infringing devices at the port of entry. I also remember that multimeters infringing on Fluke's ~~design patent~~ trademark have been blocked at the port of entry:

https://hackaday.com/2014/03/19/multimeters-without-a-countr...

barbazoo
about 1 month ago
1 reply
How practical is that for something the size of a couple pill bottles? Is that something customs would actually catch at all? They seem to have other priorities these days it seems.
wpm
about 1 month ago
Even worse, the bottles are minuscule. Each dose is dissolved in like half a mL of bacteriostatic water/saline. You could fit a years supply in 25mL, or 5 tsp.
digianarchist
about 1 month ago
1 reply
$450 CAD I believe.

US consumers would have to travel to Canada for injections which isn't practical unless you live on a border town.

It's unlikely to meet the bar for personal importation as you say.

That probably won't stop people from trying. There's already a huge market for illegal compounds and GPL-1 drugs are available alongside the usual testosterone and other steroids.

rootusrootus
about 1 month ago
2 replies
If you have a prescription from a provider in Canada, the limit for personal use is 90 days. As long as it is a legal drug in the US -- which I don't think necessarily includes that it's patented here, just that it's approved by the FDA.

> There's already a huge market for illegal compounds and GPL-1 drugs are available alongside the usual testosterone and other steroids.

The peptide and oils markets are both big, but largely separate -- the peptides folks don't seem to want to be associated with oils. Within peptides, GLP1s definitely dominate, though the other options are pretty popular. In my experience it seems like GLP1s are kind of a "gateway peptide" -- a lot of folks start with a GLP1 on the gray market, and then start to branch out and try the other options available.

dawnerd
about 1 month ago
1 reply
Flights to Canada can be pretty cheap too. Less than the cost of one month so if you flew out every 90 days you’d still come out ahead. Practically not enough people will do this of course. Would be great for people in the border towns though.
eek2121
about 1 month ago
1 reply
I don't know about that, Canada is a beautiful country. If I were on the meds, I wouldn't hesitate to fly out for a day trip every 90 days.

Also, let's be real, anyone in the northeast could be there in a few hours driving. New York City is about 7 hours away from Ottawa, for example.

doubled112
about 1 month ago
1 reply
Detroit and Windsor are a single bridge crossing away from each other. Sarnia and Port Huron too.

I’ve ended up at the border crossing from Niagara Falls to Buffalo by accident before. I was glad when they let me make a U-turn.

digianarchist
about 1 month ago
There's a tunnel between Detroit and Windsor. Faster than the bridge sometimes because no trucks.
digianarchist
about 1 month ago
You're probably right. I scanned the FDA website and wasn't sure how easy it would be to meet the requirements for personal medicine importation [0].

As a Canadian national in the US I wouldn't even attempt doing this in the current political climate.

[0] https://www.fda.gov/industry/import-basics/personal-importat...

aardvarkr
about 1 month ago
Medical tourism is a huge industry. A 3 month supply costs more than $3k in the USA. A flight to Canada costs $300 and takes a few hours of your time. I’d definitely do it if I was taking the drug.
maximus_01
about 1 month ago
Not that small. High income and roughly the same population as California, which isn't too small for companies to bother selling into.

Ozempic did about US$2bn of revenue in 2024 in Canada.

SecretDreams
about 1 month ago
Canada's one of the bigger markets for this product. That aside, think of the percentage of Americans that live driving distance of a Canadian border - it's easy to envision from meaningful lost sales just from normal Americans who go to Canada to shop on the weekend.
Marsymars
about 1 month ago
> So, though there may be a small amount that would slip through the cracks

Probably depends on enforcement, price delta, and various other variables.

e.g. something like a quarter of smartphones sold in Brazil are smuggled in, more than a small amount slipping through the cracks.

rootusrootus
about 1 month ago
As Derek mentions, Canada is the second largest market. There may be a lot coming into the US already, legal or not.
Spooky23
about 1 month ago
We don't have laws anymore. Just pay off POTUS so he can declare cheap "fat shots" and let Kushner or Barron own the importer, and you're good.
kelnos
about 1 month ago
> Yes, the patent won't be valid for Canada, but you can't import a product into the US which would infringe on a US patent.

Technically true, but in practice you can often get it across the border in personal-dose-level quantities without getting caught.

jzebedee
about 1 month ago
8 replies
> Prof. Michael Hoffman from Toronto put me on to the Canadian Patent Database, where you can find that Novo did file a patent there for semaglutide. . .but the last time they paid the annual maintenance fee on it was 2018!

> You can even find a letter where their lawyers send a refund request for the 2017 maintenance fee ($250) because Novo apparently wanted some more time to see if they wanted to pay it.

> On the same date in 2019, the office sent a letter saying that “The fee payable to maintain the rights accorded by the above patent was not received by the prescribed due date. . .”

> By that time it was $450 with the late fee added, but that was apparently too much for Novo. They had a one year grace period to make it up, and apparently never did, so their patent lapsed in Canada. And as the Canadian authorities remind them, “Once a patent has lapsed it cannot be revived”.

Impressive failure for "the second-largest semaglutide market in the world."

eulgro
about 1 month ago
1 reply
To be honest, given the efficiency of the drug and the huge benefit it could be to society, I feel like if I had been the employee in charge of filing patents I would've more than ready to lose my job in exchange for low cost general availability in the US via (illegal maybe, whatever) cross-border market. It's a nice loop hole and a great thing that once the delay expired they can't file ever again.

One's got to find ways to feel like the good guy when working for Big Pharma . That's probably not what happened but it's nice imagining it.

Vinnl
about 1 month ago
Maybe they'd even do it in exchange for just low-cost general availability in Canada!
0cf8612b2e1e
about 1 month ago
11 replies
I always wonder-in this case of such an epic company fuck up, does anyone ever get fired? Or is responsibility so diffuse that nobody is ultimately responsible?

Pharma companies are really nothing more than holders of time-limited, expensive, exclusive IP. The number one priority should be to maintain those protections as long as possible. How could any patent be allowed to lapse, even if there was limited commercial value, let alone, a blockbuster drug making billions?

userbinator
about 1 month ago
1 reply
Or is responsibility so diffuse that nobody is ultimately responsible?

That's exactly how things like this happen. No one has responsibility, thinking it's someone else's problem, so no one bothers to do the needful.

JumpCrisscross
about 1 month ago
> thinking it's someone else's problem, so no one bothers to do the needful

Or it’s in someone’s political interest to let the fuckup play out.

bawolff
about 1 month ago
2 replies
Typically when people get fired for something like this they are just the scapegoat.

A failure like this isn't just one dude forgetting, its a system failure where policies and checks failed. If it is solely up to one person that is a failure in and of itself.

nextos
about 1 month ago
3 replies
Some people, including legal experts, claim it could have been intentional: https://www.legal.io/articles/5691258/Novo-Nordisk-Lets-Cana....

I was surprised Science didn't discuss this option. However, reader comments in Science do comment on this possibility.

The idea is that letting the patent lapse would avoid getting regulated by the Patented Medicine Prices Review Board.

I know several people working at NN, and it's quite chaotic and political, so I wouldn't rule out an internal oversight.

wasabi991011
about 1 month ago
3 replies
Just FYI, this isn't "by Science", it's by Derek Lowe, this is his blog, which is hosted on Science>Commentary>Blogs. In its description, Lowe says it is "editorially independent".
philipallstar
about 1 month ago
2 replies
Then they'd be better off removing this section if "editorially independent" means "we will take things that even in their headline may not be true at all".
jbrnh
about 1 month ago
1 reply
It's a blog. It references an interview. The post is also four month old. "In the Pipeline" is generally a fantastic resource on the pharma industry and chemistry news.
philipallstar
about 1 month ago
1 reply
> It's a blog.

Not really. It doesn't look like a blog, and it's not a person/org's specific blog post. It's just called "blog" in a breadcrumb somewhere, which most people won't read. It's actual a guest editorial, but still - doesn't really look like one.

devilbunny
about 1 month ago
> it's not a person/org's specific blog post

Yeah, it really is, even if what's linked to is one post rather than the entire blog.

His stuff pops up here often enough. He really does blog at Science. Has for years and years.

If you have a background in chemistry, it's fairly accessible (i.e., he very rarely talks about anything in a depth that an undergrad chem major would have trouble understanding - which, given that most chemists start branching off very quickly in grad school, is roughly the appropriate depth for writing intended for a general chemistry audience, since it's the last common knowledge level).

SAI_Peregrinus
about 1 month ago
> Derek Lowe’s commentary on drug discovery and the pharma industry. An editorially independent blog, all content is Derek’s own, and he does not in any way speak for his employer.

The top of the sidebar describes what "In the Pipeline" is.

jhbadger
about 1 month ago
Yeah, Lowe doesn't work for Science -- he is a pharmaceutical chemist who has worked for various companies -- his "In the Pipeline" blog is interesting because while academic scientists often blog, industrial ones rarely do (perhaps for legal/IP reasons).
consp
about 1 month ago
You just described how the general public should view opinion pieces but acts like the previous comment and assumes it is "news". (To add: this is very human to do)
nl
about 1 month ago
2 replies
I'm having trouble understanding the argument outlined in the legal.io link:

> Nordisk has rejected any suggestion that the loss of its Canadian semaglutide patent was a simple mistake. In a statement cited by Fortune, the company stressed that its intellectual property strategy is “carefully considered at a global level,” indicating intentionality rather than a blunder.

> Legal analysts believe the decision was deliberate. Steven Shape, IP Chair at Omnus Law, noted that the annual $250–$450 fee was negligible compared to the looming expiration of both data exclusivity and patent protection in January 2026. Shape argued the lapse was likely “a clear decision by Novo,” not an error.

> That interpretation is bolstered by the company’s simultaneous filing of a Certificate of Supplementary Protection (CSP) in Canada, suggesting Novo valued extended market exclusivity beyond the patent’s life. But because the underlying patent lapsed early, the CSP cannot take effect.

If the interpretation is bolstered by the company’s filing for CSP, but they were ineligible for CSP because they let the patent expire doesn't that imply it was an error?

I'd never heard of CSPs before, but https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supplementary_protection_certi... has some details. They seem to be a patent extension in all but name.

simonh
about 1 month ago
1 reply
It depends what the “simultaneous filing of the CSP” was simultaneous with. If it was simultaneous with letting the patent expire that makes no sense. If it was simultaneous with the original filing of the patent that does make sense.
bawolff
about 1 month ago
1 reply
Based on the gov website it sounds like it has to be filed within 120 days of filing the patent, so i guess its the latter.

It might not be as nonsensical as the alternative, but I still dont understand how the CSP filing makes it any less likely letting the patent lapse was a mistake.

simonh
about 1 month ago
1 reply
I think it's interpreted as meaning that the company is generally committed to patent protection, and so if they let it lapse in this case despite several warning letters that it's more likely it was a conscious decision for commercial reasons. Which is what they claim. I don't think it's a particularly strong argument.
bawolff
about 1 month ago
Ah yes, the ole', it can't be a mistake because companies don't make mistakes therefor it must have been intentional.

I know you're not the one making the argument but it really is rediculously silly to argue that it must be an intentional action to not do something because in the past the company wanted to do the thing. While duh, a mistake by definition is something you dont want to do.

kelseydh
about 1 month ago
Back in 2018, it wasn't widely known that Ozempic would become a blockbuster weight loss drug. So it was possible they made the business decision based on its more limited use as a diabetes drug.
bawolff
about 1 month ago
Given how much of a blockbuster drug it is, wouldn't it be worth it for generics to rerun the trials in this specific case?
aspenmayer
about 1 month ago
1 reply
> If it is solely up to one person that is a failure in and of itself.

I would agree. The so-called bus factor has been common knowledge in the industries in question for literal decades now.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bus_factor

> An early instance of this sort of query was when Michael McLay publicly asked, in 1994, what would happen to the Python language if Guido van Rossum were to be hit by a bus.

http://legacy.python.org/search/hypermail/python-1994q2/1040...

nextos
about 1 month ago
1 reply
The process for the patent to lapse in Canada is quite long, and you get warning letters once deadlines are close.

There is also a possibility of a paying a late fee and, finally, there is also a reinstatement process.

NN could have missed all these, but they would have to be a really dysfunctional organization. Definitely not a low bus-factor situation.

aspenmayer
about 1 month ago
2 replies
I wasn’t casting aspersions on NN, but jumping off from the allusion that was made by the user who I replied to.

I don’t know what kind of sequence of events could lead to this outcome at NN, but perhaps they were hoist by their own petard. I’m reminded of the “money on the ground” joke involving two economists, which is semi-famous in these parts.

To wit:

> Economist 1: Look, there’s $20 on the ground!

> Economist 2: No there isn’t. If there were, someone would have picked it up already.

https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/06/19/money-on-the-ground/

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28029044

Perhaps the folks at NN are so busy picking up (billions of) dollars that they neglect the dimes on the ground that it would cost to comply with these seemingly trivial, even menial functional requirements of keeping their money printer running.

I’m honestly as befuddled by this brouhaha as anyone. This is a monumental failure of multiple entire business units to perform the core competencies of their jobs. That said, I could honestly believe that the number of people whose job it is (or perhaps was) to worry about the patent expiry at all, let alone be aware of the repeated communiques from the Canadian patent office, is quite low. I would further believe that the accountability dodging has only just begun behind closed doors, if the internal game of megacorporate musical chairs hasn’t already concluded well before this news broke and reached the shores of HN.

Marsymars
about 1 month ago
1 reply
Even at large corps, it's fairly common to outsource IP work to law firms that specialize in IP - and if you're Danish, it might make sense to outsource to a Danish law firm that has its own worldwide IP contacts (rather than getting your own worldwide branch offices to handle local IP laws everywhere). One of said contacts might then pawn off the work onto a junior, who then has their assistant handle all communiques from CIPO. Said assistant could then entirely drop the ball.

I've zero idea about anything specific to Novo Nordisk, but have enough exposure to IP in Canada to envision the above happening in other cases.

xmcqdpt2
about 1 month ago
That may be true if IP is not your core business but it is basically the core business of pharmaceutical companies. I don't speak from experience but it would seem surprising to me that any major pharma would outsource IP protection in a major market to contractors they can't sue for billions if they mess up.

It seems much more likely to me that they did it on purpose, as they claim to have.

philipallstar
about 1 month ago
> Perhaps the folks at NN are so busy picking up (billions of) dollars that they neglect the dimes on the ground that it would cost to comply with these seemingly trivial, even menial functional requirements of keeping their money printer running.

This isn't what that joke means.

foofoo12
about 1 month ago
1 reply
> Or is responsibility so diffuse that nobody is ultimately responsible

It doesn't take a very large company for this to happen. I've seen it in a sub 50 person company. There is a task to be done but no one can do it because everyone involved is waiting for someone else to do something. It's like a Mexican standoff.

mcny
about 1 month ago
1 reply
It could be something as simple as answering the phone. Or checking if the default image for a product on an ecommerce website exists. If you answer the phone or write a quick script to check if the default image exists, now you sort of become the person who is "expected" to do this task.

Boggles my mind.

foofoo12
about 1 month ago
Spot on. Often it's also thankless tasks whilst being foundation for the company to run. Someone has to answer the phone.
Rebelgecko
about 1 month ago
1 reply
Is this the patent equivalent of letting your website's cert expire?
crummy
about 1 month ago
More like letting the domain expire, and someone else snapping it up before you can renew.
nijuashi
about 1 month ago
3 replies
Saying pharma companies are just holders of ‘expensive, time-limited IP’ is not only wrong, it’s offensive to those of us who actually do the science. We spend years designing, testing, and validating drugs, not scheming to hike prices. We’re not all Shkrelis out here.
cperciva
about 1 month ago
3 replies
I may be wrong, but aren't most drugs sold by large pharma companies actually developed elsewhere and then acquired?
workerthread
about 1 month ago
1 reply
Novo Nordisk does the vast majority of their RD in-house. I can’t speak to other companies.
adolph
about 1 month ago
I've read a little about Novo Nordisk's history and it is a pretty interesting story about aligning financial success with human flourishing. The pharmaco is a subsidiary of a anti-diabetes foundation started from proceeds from getting permission to produce insulin.

The foundation has an objective of providing support for scientific, humanitarian and social purposes. . . . In 2024, the foundation distributed a total of DKK 10.1 billion (approx. $1.39 billion) and paid out DKK 6.9 billion ($1.08 billion) in grants. [0]

0. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novo_Nordisk_Foundation

BDPW
about 1 month ago
Having seen AstraZeneca inside, this is not the case. There's quite a lot of development going on. It is all non-fundamental though, the focus is heavily on late stage. No identification of disease mechanisms and such.
j7ake
about 1 month ago
A drug is almost never acquired that can then be put directly to patients and sold.

Large pharma makes strategic bets on several drugs, some initiated in house, others acquired, but they all just go through further optimization and testing before it is approved.

Huge RnD is required even if drug is “simply acquired”

0cf8612b2e1e
about 1 month ago
I was a bench scientist (proteomics) in pharma for over a decade. There is plenty of sweat and blood going into the pipeline, but a company is ultimately defined by the strength of its (patent) portfolio. Which is why a patent cliff drives their valuations.
vintermann
about 1 month ago
But are you the pharma companies? It's not mandatory to identify that strongly with your employer.
Eupolemos
about 1 month ago
Uh, Novo is having an absolutely massive firing round; the CEO got axed first and Denmark now has a glut of qualified unemployed which we're all doing our best to hire ASAP :D (we just had the lowest unemployment rate in our history)

(Novo hired _way_ too many people because 'infinite money')

benrawk
about 1 month ago
I mean the CEO got fired…
m463
about 1 month ago
to me, I am reminded of countless DNS renewal mistakes that are publicized.
chvid
about 1 month ago
They are getting fired now - as Novo is in major crisis mode and going through its largest layoffs ever.
ionwake
about 1 month ago
after working in many companies for decades I can guarantee that the person responsible is some middle manager, who will just blame one of her/his workers who had that piece of work "deprioritised" to instead focus on the styling of a spreadsheet. The paper trail will point to the manager, who will just claim it was allocated to a problem character.

The cartharsis comes in knowing that them firing the innocent just keeps them repeating the mistake.

hibikir
about 1 month ago
In your typical large company, there's always enough nebulous process as to minimize personal accountability for any decision that is made. There might be a decision maker in practice, but there will be enough wide meetings and committees so that the groups as a whole can make bad decision, or a very immoral decisions, with minimal risk of consequences for anyone involved. Raising tough questions in those rooms is a good way to not make friends, and end up isolated in an unimportant position after the next semi-anual reorg.

Even in companies with a strong CEO who is, in fact, lording over everyone, mechanisms will be built to make sure said CEO's bad decisions were group decisions, and that most of the people around him agreed.

gpt5
about 1 month ago
5 replies
Canadian manufacturers (Sandoz and Apotex) are preparing to launch their own generic versions in early 2026.

I bet many Americans would travel to Canada to buy it there (despite the legality concerns). The medications lasts 2 years in a refrigerator.

rootusrootus
about 1 month ago
2 replies
If you're going to go for a two year supply, it's probably better to just risk shipping it. You're not going to come home with that much without it getting confiscated, and you're way more likely to be searched individually than a typical package is.
themafia
about 1 month ago
1 reply
You should be able to travel with a 90 day supply without issue.
daniel_iversen
about 1 month ago
1 reply
Not an American but there’s only very limited circumstances you can travel across the border home to the USA with foreign prescription drugs, right? And this scenario wouldn’t cover it. Unless you just meant they won’t get caught or maybe not fined or confiscated in practice? :)
toomuchtodo
about 1 month ago
1 reply
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45638316
valicord
about 1 month ago
4 replies
That's mainly for visitors. If you're a US resident, you can't just buy medicines abroad, unless of course we are talking about the "they won’t get caught" scenario.
chronos00
about 1 month ago
1 reply
US residents can buy medicines abroad the FDA link says personal importation is allowed as long as the medicines are FDA approved and are not being imported for commercial purposes. Now in the context of the original post maybe generic versions of Ozempic won't technically be FDA approved yet if the company that produces it has to wait for the US patent to expire.
jay_kyburz
about 1 month ago
The FDA approved version may be significantly cheaper to compete with the generic brands.

I also wonder if only the "active ingredients" need to be FDA approved, and the packaging is irrelevant?

axus
about 1 month ago
The major legal question for generic Ozempic imports will be, did Novo Nordisk buy Trump coins or donate to the White House ballroom?
vl
about 1 month ago
Of course you can buy medicine abroad and legally bring 90 day doses.

More over, you can order and ship medicine, including ozempic and zepbound, using American prescription from Canadian online pharmacies. For some drugs it’s quite cheaper than paying American prices.

Muromec
about 1 month ago
Sounds like an opportunity for non-residents.
c2h5oh
about 1 month ago
2 replies
With de minimis for US-bound packages suspended I suspect way more packages are inspected than used to be.
JumpCrisscross
about 1 month ago
1 reply
> With de minimis for US-bound packages suspended I suspect way more packages are inspected than used to be

But a smaller fraction.

If you’re paranoid, route it via the UAE. All my European and Indian shippers are doing that for tariff-free pricing. (Personal stuff. I’ll pay a customs duty if I get it, of course.)

CamperBob2
about 1 month ago
2 replies
You can import from UAE without paying any duties or fees?
delfinom
about 1 month ago
1 reply
I mean that entire region has bought the president, even got themselves a military base being built on American land now too.

So why not.

seszett
about 1 month ago
1 reply
> got themselves a military base being built on American land now too

As a European I'm as critical of the US government as can be and their president has definitely been bought, but there are already several countries that have some training facilities and military personnel in the US.

Calling it a foreign military base is really unnecessarily hyperbolic. And given the amount of military bases that the US have on foreign land, the outrage also seems a bit misplaced.

adastra22
about 1 month ago
1 reply
I suspect he was repeating a soundbite and doesn’t know the actual (entirely reasonable) situation.
adastra22
about 1 month ago
For those downvoting: we sell fighter jets to many countries, including the UAE. They send pilots here to train on flying these jets. Those pilots need a place to stay.

For their own security protocols, among other reasons, many partner nations prefer to have a small area set up, think of it like a consulate, where their people stay within their own jurisdiction, rather than a hotel. The UAE is setting up such a place for its pilots.

That is all.

This isn’t a force-projection military base on US soil.

JumpCrisscross
about 1 month ago
At least for wine, furniture, cheese, olive oil, art, kitchen equipment and medicine, at least from Italy and Germany and India and Taiwan, in the last six months, allegedly.
bparsons
about 1 month ago
Higher enforcement demands probably lead to more stuff slipping through.
AnimalMuppet
about 1 month ago
2 replies
Um, what are the legality concerns? Is it illegal to bring medicine for your own use over the border? If not that, then what?

(Honest question. I don't know.)

ano-ther
about 1 month ago
1 reply
https://www.fda.gov/industry/import-basics/personal-importat...
dataflow
about 1 month ago
This sounds like something the current SCOTUS should be more than happy to shoot down, no? If you're bringing medication for yourself from abroad that you obtained legally, why should the FDA's concerns for your own safety trump (no pun intended) your freedom?
jacobgorm
about 1 month ago
1 reply
Just don’t do it in a speed boat.
Scoundreller
about 1 month ago
More government attacks on the freedom of law-abiding speed boat owners
stevehawk
about 1 month ago
3 replies
the shelf life is probably longer than that if you buy it in dehydrated form and don't hydrate it (but i have no idea)
ReptileMan
about 1 month ago
1 reply
So cocaine from the south, ozempic from the north, fetanyl from the west and the meth is homegrown. So USA just need some powder from europe to close the circle.
OptionOfT
about 1 month ago
1 reply
That would be MDMA.
fragmede
about 1 month ago
2 replies
Wait, but where does Elon's ketamine come from?
pqtyw
about 1 month ago
Doesn't he have his own legal lab?
ReptileMan
about 1 month ago
Mars
gus_massa
about 1 month ago
1 reply
I guess you get more shelf life, but it's an injectable drug.

You probably have to disolve it in very clean water in a very clean container. Do you have to match the salinity and pH with the proprties of the blood? How much time must you stir it to ensure it's completely disolved? Do you have to add something to increase/reduce viscosity? Some alcohol in case there are a few bacterias or improve solubility? How long does the small homemade batch last in the fridge?

IIUC there is another version in pills, they may have a longer shelf life, or not. But ask a medical doctor before taking a ramdom medicine.

stevehawk
about 1 month ago
1 reply
Bacteriostatic water is widely available and you hydrate it in the container it comes in. Its pretty easy. I promise you you probably know someone on a glp-1 that is already doing this.
gus_massa
about 1 month ago
1 reply
I found it in a mainstream site here. 30ml for $300, with free shipping for next Wednesday. It has classified as a "nutricional supplement" for bodybuilders. I didn't purchase it, but I guess now I'm in yet another list.
VuickB6
about 1 month ago
1 reply
There are places to get it WAY cheaper than that. I started off buying single vials for big money until I found group buys. Once my wife started using them too it was going to be too damn expensive to buy single vials. You can get kits (packs of 10 vials) for a lot less money. Been doing this 2 years now!
gus_massa
about 1 month ago
I guess so, but I was just curious and I made a quick search.
greycol
about 1 month ago
2 replies
While I'm all for saving costs, I would be shocked if mixing your own inject-able medicine either weekly (with the chance of making a mistake in dosage or sterility) or too such a high degree of sterility that you can confidentally store several doses is not worth the $200 return flight every two years. Maybe I'm overestimating the risks but it still seems like a small saving for it.

Realistically the cost of semiglutide in generic form means you could fly return every 90 days (personal import restriction for perscription meds) and still save $1000 every 3 months (3x$500 monthly - return flight - generic cost).

choilive
about 1 month ago
2 replies
Its remarkably straightforward. Not fool-proof, but easy. Bacteriostatic water, single use needles/syringes, and self healing injection port vials makes it simple to maintain sterility throughout the process.

Multiple doses can be mixed and stored in the fridge for 4-6 weeks.

kimos
about 1 month ago
1 reply
While I agree and this all seems reasonable, I think you give the average person far too much credit.
stevehawk
about 1 month ago
1 reply
it's extremely common. everyone i know that's on a glp-1 does it this way. that way you can buy it in bulk for a discount. i buy mine roughly 35 weeks worth of doses at a time.
qgin
about 1 month ago
How do they have confidence that the vials they're getting are sterile / pure / free of endotoxins / etc?
SoftTalker
about 1 month ago
This is commonly done for injectable fertility treatments, though in my experience they are hydrated just before use.
phantom784
about 1 month ago
If you live near the border, of if you regularly travel to Canada anyways, then the travel cost isn't an issue.
reaperducer
about 1 month ago
I bet many Americans would travel to Canada to buy it there

Why travel? There are thousands of ads on TV, radio, and the internet each day for Canadian pharmacies that promise to ship whatever you need to the U.S.

loeg
about 1 month ago
I think the biggest legality concern is having your shipment seized at the border. Maybe a risk but it’s not exactly a scheduled drug.
duxup
about 1 month ago
1 reply
That letter from lawyers probably cost more than 250 …
abirch
about 1 month ago
1 reply
The sad thing is they probably were billed 500 dollars for the lawyers to “read” it.
duxup
about 1 month ago
I have an acquaintance working big law. They said the billing was "more offensive thank you could possibly imagine" ... but they took the money of course.
foxglacier
about 1 month ago
2 replies
Don't be so quick to assume it was a failure not intentional. One of the comments in the article suggests it could have been to avoid PMPRB which is price control for patented drugs.
PerryUlysses
about 1 month ago
The company said it was intentional, probably because of the reason you mentioned: “In a statement to Fortune, Novo Nordisk said there was no mistake regarding its patent maintenance fee in Canada.”
Scoundreller
about 1 month ago
I still don’t get that though: is that worth losing exclusivity over?

I guess they think some other production patent will let them maintain exclusivity without it being a patent on the drug itself?

ChrisMarshallNY
about 1 month ago
I totally believe this happened.

If anyone has worked in a big, hidebound corporation, they are familiar with the "That's not my job" quandary.

general1465
about 1 month ago
This is impressive feat of bean counting. To save few thousand dollars, they lost market of few billion dollars. Good job.
decimalenough
about 1 month ago
Remember that back in the dim antiquity of 2017, semaglutide was an experimental drug for type 2 diabetes. The sales explosion only happened a few years later when it started being prescribed for weight loss.
rahimnathwani
about 1 month ago
3 replies
AIUI, because they let the patent expire, the drug was not subject to price regulation by the government. So they could charge whatever.

And during most of that time, they were still protected by 'data exclusivity' which means that any generic producer could not get approved without doing their own clinical trials, until 8 years had passed.

So they gave up some period of exclusivity in return for being able to charge a higher price when they still had a monopoly.

Emphere
about 1 month ago
2 replies
Thanks, can you point to where you found this info?
malshe
about 1 month ago
See the comments on that article where a few people have pointed this out.
rahimnathwani
about 1 month ago
Sorry, pieced together from different sources.

I am not an expert.

Here's one about the price control on patented drugs: https://www.torys.com/our-latest-thinking/publications/2024/...

dghlsakjg
about 1 month ago
1 reply
The price in Canada is ~$175 USD month for name brand Ozempic where I am with no coupons, or other discounts. I see prices in the US around $800+/month.

That is significantly cheaper than the US, and cheaper than other GLP-1 class drugs up here, arguably reasonable. Is the supposition that they would have been forced to charge even less? If so, why are their competitors who kept their patents not charging more?

Counterpoint: Mounjaro/Tirzepatide did keep their patent protection. They are able to, and do, charge significantly more.

SoftTalker
about 1 month ago
2 replies
Everyone I know taking these is buying generic compounded formulas. Insurance mostly doesn’t cover it so the go for the cheaper options.
dghlsakjg
about 1 month ago
4 replies
That doesn't figure into the pricing strategy or giving away patent protection in Canada in 2018 as far as I can tell?

Compounding isn't allowed in Canada, currently, so I assume you are talking about the US? Compounding Ozempic in the US wasn't a thing in 2018 when this patent was released in Canada, so not sure what one has to do with the other.

What are you getting at in reference to the argument that the patent was released intentionally in order to charge a higher price?

Marsymars
about 1 month ago
1 reply
> Compounding isn't allowed in Canada, currently

How does this work? Why/when would compounding not be allowed?

dghlsakjg
about 1 month ago
If health Canada determines there is a shortage, compounding is allowed. Health Canada has determined that there is no longer a shortage.
wasabi991011
about 1 month ago
1 reply
> Compounding isn't allowed in Canada

I'm not sure why you think that, compounding is allowed, I live right be a compounding pharmacy. And confirmed it's legal through google.

dghlsakjg
about 1 month ago
I should be more specific. Compounding Ozempic isn't allowed since it is not considered to be a shortage anymore by Health Canada.
SoftTalker
about 1 month ago
1 reply
Yes I’m in the USA. I just mentioned that because nobody I know is paying $800/mo. They are buying compounded injections online.
fragmede
about 1 month ago
2 replies
roughly how much are they paying, then?
addaon
about 1 month ago
I pay about $300 for a “one month supply”, which lasts me around 12 weeks.
SoftTalker
about 1 month ago
Probably half that, or less.
malfist
about 1 month ago
1 reply
Compounding isn't some shady enterprise. Its a standard medical use case. I have to use metronidozol cream on my face, but I'm allergic to some preservatives, so a compounding pharmacy makes a version of metronidozol cream without my allergens.

It's also relatively common for toddlers who need special doses, or for people who can't swallow pills and need liquid formulations.

Compounding is normal.

dghlsakjg
about 1 month ago
My comment was in reference to compounding for straight Ozempic prescriptions, which is currently not allowed in Canada since it is not in shortage.

I was making no judgement on compounding generally.

whimsicalism
about 1 month ago
yes, the US govt is being shockingly lax in its IP enforcement here. i suspect it would be much harder to acquire if ozempic/wegovy were produced by an American company
chronos00
about 1 month ago
Seems like a plausible explanation, the government should reform the price regulation laws to avoid this endrun around price controls.
choffman
about 1 month ago
There's about to be a lot of skinny people in Canada bordering states. :)
bstsb
about 1 month ago
looking at the filing, they had their patent deadline extended due to COVID-19 eighteen times!

https://brevets-patents.ic.gc.ca/opic-cipo/cpd/eng/patent/26...

72 more comments available on Hacker News

View full discussion on Hacker News
ID: 45637744Type: storyLast synced: 11/20/2025, 8:23:06 PM

Want the full context?

Jump to the original sources

Read the primary article or dive into the live Hacker News thread when you're ready.

Read ArticleView on HN
Not Hacker News Logo

Not

Hacker

News!

AI-observed conversations & context

Daily AI-observed summaries, trends, and audience signals pulled from Hacker News so you can see the conversation before it hits your feed.

LiveBeta

Explore

  • Home
  • Hiring
  • Products
  • Companies
  • Discussion
  • Q&A

Resources

  • Visit Hacker News
  • HN API
  • Modal cronjobs
  • Meta Llama

Briefings

Inbox recaps on the loudest debates & under-the-radar launches.

Connect

© 2025 Not Hacker News! — independent Hacker News companion.

Not affiliated with Hacker News or Y Combinator. We simply enrich the public API with analytics.