West Virgina Public Radio presented an interesting piece that updates that Mylan story. As reported here, Mylan has filed suit against the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and the two reporters who wrote the original story re: Mylan's internal report about workers overriding computer warnings. The FDA has since reviewed the issue and declared appropriate remediation was taken by the company.
The suit against the reporters, and the newspaper, focuses on how they obtained, and used, the internal report.
In the meantime, the Post-Gazette is the same newspaper that broke the story of the bogus MBA obtained by Mylan's CEO. That former CEO was promoted to President of the company a month ago. A feud in the hollows?
In any event, there remain a number of interesting features of the story, including:
1. The reality of internal regulation, which is obviously a good thing.
2. Whether Mylan ought to have at least notified the FDA of its own policing, what it found, and what it did?
3. Whether such events are "newsworthy" if material for their reporting is appropriately obtained. It would seem that the version of the story we now have--Mylan's successfully halting what might have been an enormously serious problem--would only be good for the company's reputation. But the opportunity to bring it out was never taken.
4. Is it possible that a habit of secrecy, certainly legitimate in many instances, also works to the industry's disfavor in others?