суббота, 21 октября 2017 г.

The sky’s the limit for pharmaceutical profits?

The sky’s the limit for pharmaceutical profits?

Pharmaceuticals Can be a License to Print Money?

But guess who pays the price?

The Patient!

Unfortunately, even though the FDA requires years of testing and experimentation, some dangerous drugs can still be found in pharmacies. Sometimes side-effects take years to materialize and at other times the testing on the drug during the approval stages was not sufficiently thorough.
If your condition has worsened as a result of either prescription or over the counter drug use then you may be able to hold the pharmaceutical company liable for damages. The following list of drugs includes most of the drugs that have been known to cause damages to the takers.

The Law Offices of Gregory Krasovsky take on all legitimate pharmaceutical claims. We believe that our clients are always entitled to just recompense for the damages inflicted as a result of malfunctioning curative mechanisms.

Pharmaceuticals Can be a License to Print Money

Using data gathered by the St. Louis branch of the Federal Reserve Bank, the consumer price index for pharmaceutical preparation manufacturing for the first quarter of 2017 was 747.8, with January 1, 1980, as the benchmark of 100. In other words, the price of pharmaceuticals is seven and half times higher than they were at the start of 1980. (See graph above.)

How does that compare with inflation or other products? Quite well — for pharmaceutical companies. That more than sevenfold increase in drug prices is an increase nearly two and half times greater than inflation for the period, and nearly four times that of all commodities.

So, yes, unconscionable price-gouging is the cause here. By the industry as a whole, not simply individuals like “Pharma Bro” Martin Shkreli, who might be an outlier in his brazenness but not in his profit-generation plan.

Although not the entire picture, this snapshot of corporate extortion plays a significant role in why the cost of the United States not having a universal health care system is more than $1.4 trillion per year.

Among 19 broadly defined “major” industrial sectors in the U.S., health technology is again expected to be found the most profitable for 2016, with a profit margin of 21.6 percent. Higher even than finance at 17 percent. When narrowing to more specific, narrowly defined industry categories, generic pharmaceuticals sit at the top with an expected 30 percent profit margin for 2016. Major pharmaceuticals rank fourth at 25.5 percent on a list in which health products and finance claim nine of the top 10 spots.

The sky’s the limit for pharmaceutical profits

That’s a repeat of 2015, when health technology had the highest profit margin of 19 broadly defined industrial sectors, at 20.9 percent, topping even finance, the second highest. When a separate study broke down profit margins by more specific industry categories, health care-related industries comprised three of the six most profitable.

Nothing new there, either. A BBC report found that pharmaceuticals and banks tied for the highest average profit margin in 2013, with five pharmaceutical companies enjoying a profit margin of 20 percent or more — Pfizer, Hoffmann-La Roche, AbbVie, GlaxoSmithKline and Eli Lilly. The world’s 10 largest pharmaceutical corporations racked up a composite US$90 billion in profits for 2013, according to the BBC analysis. As to their expenses, these 10 firms spent far more on sales and marketing than they did on research and development.

If those facts and figures aren’t enough, here’s another way of looking at excessive profits — a 2015 study found that, of the 10 corporations that have the highest revenue per employee among the world’s biggest corporations, three are health care companies. Two of the three, Amerisourcebergen and McKesson, both distribute pharmaceuticals, and the other, Express Scrips, administers prescription drug benefits for tens of millions of health-plan members. Each of these primarily operates in the United States, the only advanced-capitalist country without universal health coverage.
And because corporations have the ear of politicians and other government officials, it’s no surprise that one of the primary ongoing goals of the U.S. government for so-called “free trade” agreements, such as the Trans-Pacific Partnership, is to impose rules that would weaken the national health care systems of other countries. This was done in TPP negotiations at the direct behest of U.S.-based pharmaceutical companies, incensed that countries like New Zealand make thousands of medicines, medical devices and related products available at subsidized costs.

By far the most expensive system while delivering among the worst outcomes and leaving tens of millions uninsured, where tens of thousands die from lack of health care annually. That is the high cost of private profit in health care. Or, to put it more bluntly, allowing the “market” to decide health outcomes instead of health care professionals.
The Law Offices of Gregory Krasovsky - http://krasovskylaw.com
Dangerous Drugs - http://krasovskylaw.com/individuals/dangerous-drugs.html

Drug and Medication Errors - http://krasovskylaw.com/drug-pharmies-meds.html
Off-Label Drug Use - http://krasovskylaw.com/off-label-drug-malpractice.html
Medical Malpractice - http://krasovskylaw.com/individuals/medical-malpractice.html

Medical Misdiagnosis - http://krasovskylaw.com/medical-misdiagnosis.html

Surgical Errors - http://krasovskylaw.com/surgial-errors.html

Military Malpractice Claims - http://krasovskylaw.com/military-malpractice-claims.html

Hospital Malpractice and Negligence - http://krasovskylaw.com/hospital-malpractice.html

Nursing Home Injury and Neglect - http://krasovskylaw.com/nursing-home-neglect-1.html

The Law Offices of Gregory Krasovsky (USA) - Social Media
   Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/krasovsky911
   Blogspot: http://krasovsky911.blogspot.com

среда, 9 августа 2017 г.

Warning on "The Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act."

In light of the recent passage and signing into law of

"The Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act (H.R. 3364, Pub.L. 115–44)",

don't risk running afoul of U.S. sanctions against Russia - please seek competent legal advice on how to do business legally with & in Russia.
FYI, please consider reading The Ukrainian-Russian-American Observer post on "Russians Should Urgently Repatriate Their Assets From the West" at


The Law Offices of Gregory Krasovsky (Washington, DC, USA and Moscow, Russia):
Russia & Former-USSR - http://krasovskylaw.com/businesses/international-services/russia-former-ussr.html
Political law - http://krasovskylaw.com/businesses/political-law.html
Immigration Law - http://krasovskylaw.com/individuals/immigration-law.html

International Business Transactions - http://krasovskylaw.com/businesses/banking-and-finance/ibt.html

International Litigation - http://krasovskylaw.com/businesses/international-litigation.html

International Tax - http://krasovskylaw.com/businesses/international-services/international-tax.html
Banking and Finance - http://krasovskylaw.com/businesses/banking-and-finance.html

Corporate Law - http://krasovskylaw.com/businesses/corporate-law.html

Cyberspace and Computer Law - http://krasovskylaw.com/businesses/computer-a-cyberspace-law.html


Countering Russian Influence in Europe and Eurasia Act of 2017.

Please read the official text at


The Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act (H.R. 3364, Pub.L. 115–44), is a United States federal law that imposed sanctions on Iran, North Korea, and Russia.
The bill was passed during the 115th Congress, 98–2 in the Senate.[1]
On August 2, 2017, President Donald Trump signed it into law while issuing two statements simultaneously that he believed the legislation was significantly flawed.[2]

Select excerpts:

The President must submit for congressional review certain proposed actions to terminate or waive sanctions with respect to the Russian Federation.[8]

Specified executive order sanctions against Russia shall remain in effect.[8]

The President may waive specified cyber- and Ukraine-related sanctions.[8]

The bill provides sanctions for activities concerning:

(1) cyber security,
(2) crude oil projects,
(3) financial institutions,
(4) corruption,
(5) human rights abuses,
(6) evasion of sanctions,
(7) transactions with Russian defense or intelligence sectors,
(8) export pipelines,
(9) privatization of state-owned assets by government officials, and
(10) arms transfers to Syria.[8]

The Department of State shall work with the government of Ukraine to increase Ukraine's energy security.[8]

The bill:

(1) directs the Department of the Treasury to develop a national strategy for combating the financing of terrorism, and
(2) includes the Secretary of the Treasury on the National Security Council.[8]


After the bill passed the Senate, on 28 July 2017, Russia′s foreign ministry announced measures that were cast as a response to the bill passed by Congress, but also referenced the specific measures imposed against the Russian diplomatic mission in the U.S. by the Barack Obama administration at the end of 2016.[16]

Russia demanded that the U.S. reduce its diplomatic and technical personnel in the Moscow embassy and its consulates in St Petersburg, Ekaterinburg and Vladivostok to 455 persons — the same as the number of Russian diplomats posted in the U.S. — by September 1;

Russia’s government would also suspend the use of a retreat compound and a storage facility in Moscow used by the US by August 1.[17][18]

Shortly after, Russian president Vladimir Putin said that the decision had been taken by him personally and that 755 employees of the U.S. diplomatic mission must ″terminate their activity in the Russian Federation″.[19][20][17]

After the bill was signed, the Russian Foreign Ministry attributed the sanctions to “Russophobic hysteria” and reserved the right to take action if it decided to.[9]

Russian prime minister Dmitry Medvedev wrote on August 2 that the law had ended hope for improving U.S.–Russia relations and meant "an all-out trade war with Russia."

His message also said, "The American establishment has won an overwhelming victory over Trump.

The president wasn't happy with the new sanctions, but he had to sign the bill."[21][22]



The Law Offices of Gregory Krasovsky (English) - http://krasovskylaw.com/

   Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/krasovsky911/


воскресенье, 23 июля 2017 г.

Man Facing Jail for Not Paying Child Support For A Child DNA Proves is NOT His!

Can a father or former husband be responsible for child support of a child that's not his biologically (not DNA father)?


Is this a case where a father should be forced to pay child support for someone else's child? Probably not...

The Law Offices of Gregory Krasovsky are equipped to work on and provide legal advice on the following issues:

- Divorce
- Legal Separation
- Domestic Partnerships
- Child Custody/ Visitation
- Child Support
- Spousal Support/ Alimony
- Domestic Violence
- Equitable Distribution
- Adultery
- Prenuptial Agreements
Family Law - http://www.krasovskylaw.com/individuals/family-law.html

Child Support - http://www.krasovskylaw.com/child-support.html

The Law Offices of Gregory Krasovsky - http://krasovskylaw.com/
  Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/krasovsky911/
  Blogspot: http://krasovsky911.blogspot.com


Man Facing Jail for Not Paying Child Support For A Child DNA Proves is NOT His!

A man is being forced to pay nearly $65,000 in child support payments for a 16-year-old daughter who is not his, according to a DNA test.

Select Excerpt:

"A court in Houston, Texas, is forcing a father to pay nearly $65,000 in child support payments for a daughter he has only met once—who is actually not his child, according to a DNA test.

Gabriel Cornejo has found himself embroiled in a legal battle after an ex-girlfriend informed him that he has a daughter who is now 16 years old. However, after meeting the girl once, Cornejo told ABC 13 that he pursued a DNA test, and learned that he is not her father.

“I never thought in my whole life I would have to defend myself or something that I am innocent of,” Cornejo said, noting that he is already raising three children of his own, along with two of his brother’s children.

Texas state law punishes nonpayment of child support harder than most. According to the Child Support Division at the Attorney Generals’ Office, Cornejo could be extorted and thrown in prison for failing to pay for a child that is not his."

Please read the rest at: http://thefreethoughtproject.com/court-forcing-man-pay-child-support-child-not-his/

понедельник, 1 мая 2017 г.

Happy American Law Day - May 1st!

Greg Krasovsky: Happy Law Day to all my American Lawyer Facebook Friends and Colleagues!

Just like the ABA suggests this year, let's not forget about the role of the 14th Amendment in the civil liberties of Americans and our civil & criminal justice systems, especially its Equal Protection clause.

Unfortunately, for many Americans, including racial & ethnic minorities as well as the poor, equal protection under The Law remains a dream.
You know what they say about lawyers - folks who try to make the world a better place one lawsuit at a time!

So, as lawyers, let's try to do what we can to make the 14th amendment an absolute reality for all American citizens and permanent residents!
Any got better ideas?


May 1st - Law Day (United States).
"On May 1 the United States officially recognizes Law Day. It is meant to reflect on the role of law in the foundation of the country and to recognize its importance for society."

About the 2017 Law Day Theme - The American Bar Association.

"The 14th Amendment: Transforming American Democracy
The 2017 theme provides the opportunity to explore the many ways that the Fourteenth Amendment has reshaped American law and society.

Through its Citizenship, Due Process and Equal Protection clauses, this transformative amendment advanced the rights of all Americans. It also played a pivotal role in extending the reach of the Bill of Rights to the states.
Ratified during Reconstruction a century and a half ago, the Fourteenth Amendment serves as the cornerstone of landmark civil rights legislation, the foundation for numerous federal court decisions protecting fundamental rights, and a source of inspiration for all those who advocate for equal justice under law."
Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

The Fourteenth Amendment (Amendment XIV) to the United States Constitution was adopted on July 9, 1868, as one of the Reconstruction Amendments.
The amendment addresses citizenship rights and equal protection of the laws, and was proposed in response to issues related to former slaves following the American Civil War.
The amendment was bitterly contested, particularly by the states of the defeated Confederacy, which were forced to ratify it in order to regain representation in Congress.
The Fourteenth Amendment, particularly its first section, is one of the most litigated parts of the Constitution, forming the basis for landmark decisions such as
- Brown v. Board of Education (1954) regarding racial segregation,
- Roe v. Wade (1973) regarding abortion,
- Bush v. Gore (2000) regarding the 2000 presidential election, and
- Obergefell v. Hodges (2015) regarding same-sex marriage.
The amendment limits the actions of all state and local officials, including those acting on behalf of such an official.
The amendment's first section includes several clauses: the Citizenship Clause, Privileges or Immunities Clause, Due Process Clause, and Equal Protection Clause.
- The Citizenship Clause provides a broad definition of citizenship, overruling the Supreme Court's decision in Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857), which had held that Americans descended from African slaves could not be citizens of the United States. The Privileges or Immunities Clause has been interpreted in such a way that it does very little.
- The Due Process Clause prohibits state and local government officials from depriving persons of life, liberty, or property without legislative authorization. This clause has also been used by the federal judiciary to make most of the Bill of Rights applicable to the states, as well as to recognize substantive and procedural requirements that state laws must satisfy.
- The Equal Protection Clause requires each state to provide equal protection under the law to all people within its jurisdiction. This clause has been the basis for many decisions rejecting irrational or unnecessary discrimination against people belonging to various groups.


The Law Offices of Gregory Krasovsky
1120 19th Street, NW, Suite LL-11
Washington, DC  20036
Tel:  +1-202-558-5287
Fax: +1-202-558-5346
Skype: Krasovsky

Website: http://www.krasovskylaw.com

среда, 26 апреля 2017 г.

U.S. judge blocks Trump order to restrict funding for 'sanctuary cities'.

Greg Krasovsky: Do sanctuary cities really "put [illegal immigrant] criminals back on the streets" by refusing to proactively cooperate with U.S. DHS ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement)?

What do you think?

The Law Offices of Gregory Krasovsky (English) - http://krasovskylaw.com/

Immigration law - http://krasovskylaw.com/individuals/immigration-law.html
Political Law - http://krasovskylaw.com/political-law.html

Russia & Former-USSR - http://krasovskylaw.com/russia-former-ussr.html

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/krasovsky911/

Blogspot: http://krasovsky911.blogspot.com


U.S. judge blocks Trump order to restrict funding for 'sanctuary cities'.
Reuters, April 25, 2017

Selected Excerpts:

"A U.S. judge on Tuesday blocked President Donald Trump's executive order that sought to withhold federal funds from so-called sanctuary cities, dealing another legal blow to the administration's efforts to toughen immigration enforcement.

The ruling from U.S. District Judge William Orrick III in San Francisco said Trump's Jan. 25 order targeted broad categories of federal funding for sanctuary governments and that plaintiffs challenging the order were likely to succeed in proving it unconstitutional.

The U.S. Justice Department said in a statement it would follow existing federal law with respect to sanctuary jurisdictions, as well as enforce conditions tied to federal grants.

Sanctuary cities generally offer safe harbor to illegal immigrants and often do not use municipal funds or resources to advance the enforcement of federal immigration laws. Dozens of local governments and cities, including New York, Los Angeles and Chicago, have joined the growing "sanctuary" movement.

Supporters of the sanctuary policy argue that enlisting police cooperation in rounding up immigrants for removal undermines communities' trust in local police, particularly among Latinos.

In his ruling, Orrick said the language of the order made it clear it sought to withhold funds beyond law enforcement.

"And if there was doubt about the scope of the Order, the President and Attorney General have erased it with their public comments," Orrick wrote.
The judge cited comments from Trump calling the order "a weapon" to use against jurisdictions that disagree with his immigration policies.

"Federal funding that bears no meaningful relationship to immigration enforcement cannot be threatened merely because a jurisdiction chooses an immigration enforcement strategy of which the President disapproves," Orrick wrote.

Dave Cortese, president of the Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors, said in a statement: "The politics of fear emanating from the Trump White House has just suffered a major setback.""

Please read the rest at: http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-immigration-ruling-idUSKBN17R2QO

вторник, 4 апреля 2017 г.

Attorney and former police officer explains the legal consequences of aggressive & reckless driving in the U.S.

Gregory Krasovsky, an attorney and a former U.S. police officer explains on Russian Television's 5th Channel (St. Petersburg) the legal consequences of aggressive driving, reckless driving and driving under the influence (DUI) of alcohol and drugs in the United States.

Interview with lawyer Greg Krasovsky begins at 1:05:27
5th Channel, show "Morning at 5"
Aired on April 3, 2017
"Golden Youth" is above the law?
Moscow spoiled rich youth posted on the Internet a new video with their "road exploits".
Why are these rich offspring so insolent?
What do they want to achieve by demonstrating their luxury and outrageous actions?
The Law Offices of Gregory Krasovsky (USA): http://krasovsky112.com

Aggressive and Reckless Driving - http://krasovskylaw.com/automobile-accidents/aggressive-driving.html

Distracted Driving - http://krasovskylaw.com/automobile-accidents/distracted-drivers-12.html

Transportation - http://krasovskylaw.com/trans-port.html
Personal Injury - http://krasovskylaw.com/individuals/personal-injury.html
Auto Accident - http://krasovskylaw.com/individuals/auto-accident.html

Rollover Accidents - http://krasovskylaw.com/automobile-defects/rollover-accident-666.html

Automobile Defects - http://krasovskylaw.com/automobile-defects.html
Pedestrian Accidents - http://krasovskylaw.com/pedestrian-accidents-2.html

Bicycle Accidents - http://krasovskylaw.com/bike-accidents.html

Criminal Defense - http://krasovskylaw.com/individuals/criminal-defense.html
Russia & Former-USSR - http://krasovsky112.com/russia-former-ussr.html

Social Media:
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/krasovsky911 (English)

Blogspot: http://krasovsky911.blogspot.com (English)

понедельник, 3 апреля 2017 г.

Arrested while applying for a green card: US immigration experts fear policy shift!

Greg Krasovsky: If you or someone you know have issues with your U.S. immigration status -- e.g. you overstayed your visa, or have abandoned your v permanent resident status by staying out of the U.S. for more than a year -- then please do NOT risk dealing with U.S. immigration authorities (USCIS, ICE, CBP and U.S. Department of State) on your own without an immigration attorney, as you could be detained (arrested), deported or barred from entering the United States!
Please consider retaining legal counsel from a competent and experienced U.S. immigration attorney who can advise you on your current legal situation, risks and available remedies.


Selected excerpt from:

Arrested while applying for a green card: US immigration experts fear policy shift!

"Multiple cases of people being arrested while seeking green cards marks a dramatic shift in immigration policy, say observers: ‘This is what we all feared’

Leandro Arriaga arrived at the immigration office with his US citizen wife and three-month-old daughter on Wednesday.

Their lawyer knew the meeting was a risk. Arriago, 43, who had come to the US from the Dominican Republic in 2000, did have an order of deportation out against him. But she had never had a client detained at a US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) meeting before.

The arrest of Arriago and at least three other people in Massachusetts this week while they were applying for their green cards marks a dramatic shift in immigration policy, say attorneys and experts.

A total of five individuals were arrested in total according to a statement from Immigration Customs Enforcement (Ice), which was responding to “an investigative tip”.

Susan Church, the head of the New England chapter of the American Immigration Lawyers Association, says that at least three of those people were in the process of applying for green cards and did not have criminal records."

Please read more at https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/apr/01/green-card-arrests-undocumented-immigration-trump


The Law Offices of Gregory Krasovsky: http://www.krasovskylaw.com

Immigration Law - http://krasovskylaw.com/immigrants.html

Social Media:

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/krasovsky911/

Blogger: http://krasovsky911.blogspot.com/