I'm kind of surprised that the author doesn't make the distinction between patent protected drugs and non-protected drugs (or devices). Sovaldi is a new thing that does something that nothing else can do. EpiPen is an old thing that does something that lots of other things can do, but does it slightly better. Gilead has an internationally sanctioned monopoly on Solvaldi (for a limited time), whereas EpiPen has taken regulatory capture to its logical, absurd conclusion (as did Turing with daraprim). The two are far different, and beyond the high prices, I don't really see much of an analogy.