Amarin is spending hundreds of millions to market Vascepa to patients and doctors for the CV risk reduction. If a doctor is putting a new patient on Vasecpa I'm guessing 99% are now related to the CV risk reduction. Judge Du's decision is telling pharma a skinny label are the legal key needed to own the car that Amarin's hundreds of millions in research and marketing built.
ziploc, a PDR link was posted yesterday by sleven #351367 with a vascepa description for hi trigs and not CVD. The buck stops at Amarin's door. Since reduce-it results, amarin has NOT been effective with updating public information to include CVD. They are by far the worst company I've ever invested in that does no PR regarding their one and only product.
Zip, I interpreted the GSK v Teva ruling the same way. I believe it was the intention of the court to clearly delineate the difference between a partial label and a skinny label. Based on the decision I think the 2 indications on the Vascepa label are intertwined and inseparable. You are a lawyer correct? Thanks. Sleven,
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
