Final answer:
Mylan faced backlash for increasing the price of EpiPens by approximately 400% between 2009 and 2016, leading to over $600 for a two-pack. In response, they offered discounts and introduced a generic version, though this might increase profits. They were also investigated for potential antitrust violations, similar to historical cases in the pharmaceutical industry.
Step-by-step explanation:
Between 2007 and 2016, Mylan experienced significant controversy over its pricing strategies for the EpiPen, a life-saving treatment for anaphylactic reactions. The dramatic price increase of the EpiPen in 2016 by approximately 400% to over $600 for a two-pack, compared to about $100 in 2009, sparked public outrage and highlighted the ethical dilemmas related to the costs of life-saving drugs. This price hike was quite profitable for Mylan as the sales of EpiPens alone earned the company $1 billion in 2015. The consequent public backlash prompted Mylan to make concessions such as offering discount coupons for EpiPens and introducing a cheaper, generic version of the device, which ironically could allow them to make more profit than reducing the price of the branded EpiPen.
By late August 2016, Mylan also came under scrutiny for potential antitrust violations regarding their EpiPen sales to public schools in New York City. The company was investigated and faced criticism for potentially monopolistic practices, but details about their total market share during this period are not specified in the provided information.
The controversies surrounding Mylan's EpiPen pricing draw parallels to historical antitrust cases, such as the prosecution of an international cartel of vitamin manufacturers in the late 1990s. Companies like Hoffman-La Roche, BASF, and Rhone-Poulenc had agreements on production and pricing, which led to artificially inflated prices and violated antitrust laws, resulting in significant fines and executive jail time. This highlights the ongoing concerns about antitrust violations and the responsibility of pharmaceutical companies to balance profit with public health needs.