Talk:Biogen

Controversy

The controversy regarding Biotech latest Alzheimer drug is not clear, and this has been big news. This comes at a time their stock is dropping. The controversy is that the Drug was approved, despite the FDA's own pannel suggesting it won't be removed. AND, there are reports of FDA officials resigning in protest over the approval. There is questions as if the Drug even works. And this all has a huge impact on the stock price and long term success of this company. This has been huge news and there are hundreds of news articles regarding it. I've referenced the top ones from Google. I suggest we combined their multiple controversy's into a single "Controversy" topic as most Wikipedia pages have.31.21.9.14 (talk) 08:25, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

References

History

The huge chunk of unwikified text which was the history section appeared to be taken directly from another Web site which specializes in business histories. Rather than go through the whole copyvio process, since the history section was defective in so many other ways, I just deleted it. There is some good material here, and if it could be summarized and properly attributed it would be worth including. (However, it said very little about the history of Idec, and from a legal and financial point of view, Biogen Idec's corporate history is that of Idec, not Biogen; even though the Biogen management took over after Biogen and Idec merged, it was Idec that bought Biogen and Idec was the surviving company in the merger. This can be verified from SEC filings.) 121a0012 (talk) 06:55, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

There was quite a bit of out-of-date information, so I created a refreshed page in my sandbox and submitted it for review. There are also a number of of additional refs. Very open to feedback, but figured it would be easiest to submit the updates via sandbox. jacob.rosen3 (talk) 01:47, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Can someone help me cleanup the section regarding the current COVID19 outbreak at Biogen in Massachusetts? — Preceding unsigned comment added by ThomasAquinas2019 (talk • contribs) 08:21, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

Content removed from Opicinumab

Content removed from Opicinumab:

"Currently, H.C. Wainwright & Co. rates Biogen stock as investment-worthy, due in part to Biogen’s many other successful drugs, especially Tecfidera, and despite the SYNERGY trial’s less-than-ideal results.  Founded in 1978, Biogen, Inc. is the one of the world’s oldest biotechnology research companies, with a specific emphasis on MS research and treatment.  Biogen has over 7,000 employees globally. In addition to manufacturing many FDA approved drugs for the treatment of MS, they also sell drugs for the treatment of hemophilia, leukemia, non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, and rheumatoid arthritis.

The most recent financial data from Biogen indicates worldwide revenues of almost $3.0 billion for 2016 Quarter 3 alone.  This is a 13% GAAP diluted EPS rise over 2015 Quarter 3 financial results. Biogen’s Tecfidera, Avonex, and Tysabri garnered the company the greatest revenues in 2015 Quarter 3, as well as in 2016 Quarters 2 and 3. Tecfidera alone was responsible for approximately 40 percent of Biogen’s revenue in 2016 Quarter 3. In all, the company saw a 2% increase in revenue in 2016 Quarter 3 over 2016 Quarter 2 and a 6% increase in revenue over 2015 Quarter 3."

- Some may be relevant to this article - Rod57 (talk) 19:49, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

References

COVID-19 section seems UNDUE

The entire section Biogen#2020_coronavirus_outbreak seems to be recentist and give undue weight to the COVID-19 outbreak. The 10-year test seems applicable: given only sources that are available now, the COVID-19 cases from the conference will be a trivial and insignificant part of the history of this company. I therefore suggest that the section be removed. Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 01:20, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

@ThomasAquinas2019: In accordance with the above, I'm removing the section. Let me know if you have any questions. Best, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 01:28, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

I think removing the section is appropriate. Natureium (talk) 01:29, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

Agree with the above. — kashmīrī ^TALK 10:37, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

It's now being covered in NYTimes, who referred to the event/company as a "super spreader", taking infections to three countries and six states. Perhaps this should be revisited. tedder (talk) 23:24, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Biogen role in the outbreak in Boston will define this company in history, put it back in please

FINALLY! thank you tedder. I was new to wiki when this was deleted, but I am still adamant that this critical to both the companies history and the pandemic. Biogen will forever be remembered for their role in the outbreak. So this will be the most significant contribution this company makes in history. Most Boston area biotech companies canceled events and went home. These guys went forward with at least two separate big events/meetings. I live in Boston and this was a big deal in March and when this pandemic is over I guarantee Biogen is going to be a part of this story. Everything has moved so fast, but they were fundamental in the outbreak here. It was at one point literally responsible for 2/3 of all the infections in Massachusetts. Early on it was listed in all the state's reporting figures as a distinct "cluster," while the number of those infected and associated with Biogen would grow daily. In mid-March, a Chinese-American official with Biogen was arrested trying to enter China with overt COVID19 symptoms. It didn't take Chinese authorities long to figure out that she was part of the cluster and they arrested her. The company publicly distanced itself from her and she was terminated. The press in China reported she could spend up seven years in jail for intentionally trying to deceive customs officials in China concerning her contacts in Boston and her COVID19 role in the Boston-Biogen COVID19 cluster. ThomasAquinas2019 (talk) 00:46, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Yes, put it back in... MaynardClark (talk) 18:48, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

• What a heap of bs. this will be the most significant contribution this company makes in history WTF? Are you arguing that a 2020 meeting will be what the company will be most famous for in history? Really? Have you heard of Biogen before? Can you find a reliable source that is making such a prediction? Biogen will forever be remembered for their role in the outbreak. What role, pardon me, other than their meeting happening to be one of hundreds (if not thousands) of disease epicentres that have been identified globally? they were fundamental in the outbreak here Let me remind you that millions of people infected others and thousands spread the disease to other countries. Do you really want to litter their employers' articles with all of that? — kashmīrī ^TALK 19:42, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

• The prominence (particularly in the lead sentences) does seem undue, though I'm not an expert in WP policy and certainly not on the judgement of history, and could easily be proved wrong. However, it is a significant event in the progress of the disease in the US and, to a lessr extent, the world. if there were hundreds or even thousands of epicentres in the US, then this is one of the more significant ones as it is indirectly responsible for 300,000 infections doi:10.1126/science.abe3261 ie 1.6% of US infections, or around 0.4% of infections worldwide according to that paper. Given this, it seems likely that there will be at least some long-term memory of this event. 62.64.181.191 (talk) 15:39, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

References

• If it's going to stay in, it should at least mention the year 2020 explicitly.

Anewc2 (talk) 13:58, 16 September 2021 (UTC)