What good are analysts who are consistently wrong? For instance, take Arena Pharmaceuticals (ARNA) after FDA Panel Votes Against Arena's Diet Drug Lorcaserin. How much money did their clients lose? Not all analysts work for brokerage houses, but many do, and their pay is not determined by the accuracy of their calls but the increase in sales.

How do they explain their backpedaling? One day they are pushing the stock and the next they are running for cover. Clearly they have to change their opinions based on new information, but perhaps there was too much wild speculation to begin with. More likely, they made too many false assumptions, which they love to do in a crowd so as not to be the lone incompetent.

Drug manufacturer Allergan, Inc. (AGN) will be reporting its second quarter results on Monday, with analysts expecting to see an 8% earnings increase from the same period last year.

Analysts have forecast earnings of $0.81 for the quarter, versus $0.75 during the same period last year.

Allergan has managed to outpace analyst estimates for each of the past six quarters, and has not failed to at least match estimates since the first quarter of 2007.

CVS Caremark (CVS) has received notice from Walgreen (WAG) that the latter would not participate as a provider in any new prescription drug plans awarded to CVS's pharmacy benefit manager after June 7.

Walgreen feels that it's no longer "in the best interests of its customers, pharmacists and shareholders to grow its future business" with CVS. Any current CVS plans in which Walgreen is already a service provider will not be impacted.

Insurance companies just bought themselves a year. Claiming that a proposed tax on health insurance would force them to charge higher premiums, carriers were able to convince senators to defer this particular measure for a year.

This comes as a benefit to UnitedHealth Group (UNH), WellPoint (WLP) and smaller companies writing health insurance policies. Manufacturers of medical devices have won some relief, as well, though the drug business didn't. An earlier plan to tax cosmetic medical procedures was also scrapped.

Bernie Madoff is getting used to his new neighbors. Gone are the days of Montauk and Manhattan, and he isn't sharing his space with topless dancers.

Now, he says goodnight to a drug pusher, chills with a former mobster, and hangs with a convicted spy ... and these guys are probably saying, "I hang around with Bernie Madoff." The former financier Ponzi schemer spends his evenings walking laps around the prison track at the Butner Federal Correctional Complex, not far from Raleigh, N.C.

• Intel Corporation (NASDAQ: INTC): Chipmaker Intel Corp. traded up to a new 52 week high today of $20.65. It set its 52 week low of $12.05 back on 2/23/09. The stock is trading higher today ahead of the company's third quarter earnings numbers, which are due out tomorrow following the market close. Analysts are expecting the company to show earnings of 27 cents per share. The company reported a loss of 7 cents per share for its second quarter. The stock closed the day up 1.1% at $20.40, up $0.23 on the day.

The dealmaking continues apace in the drug sector. Today, Warner Chilcott plc (NASDAQ: WCRX) agreed to shell out $3.1 billion for the global pharma business of Procter & Gamble (NYSE: PG). The deal is all-cash.

There are several megatrends driving the pharma deals. First, it's getting tougher to produce new drugs. And unfortunately, many pharma companies are running out on the patent protection of key money-makers. At the same time, President Obama is intent on getting some type of reform in health care.

Merck (NYSE: MRK) lost a lot of legal cases over whether its arthritis drug caused heart problems in patients. It even spent $4.85 billion to settle a lot of the claims against it. But, that did not end every suit, and the company is faced with new data that raises questions about the dangers of the drug.

Tough for Merck. But, putting out dangerous drugs can have side affects for both patient and company. According to Reuters, " A long-term analysis of people who took the arthritis drug Vioxx confirms it doubles the risk of strokes and heart attacks."

Most of these lawsuits come down to "did the company know of the danger, and, if so when?" Merck probably did not settle so many cases because it believed it was entirely in the right. It is hard to imagine that it did not have some sense that the data from the new study is true. It did test its own drug before it went on the market. But, did it test it well? Or, did it find that there were possible health risks but that they were acceptable? At least from a monetary standpoint.

The cynical observers of drug company practices say that the firms balance litigation costs against the money that they get from sales. If a product has some danger, it does not matter too much if it makes a great deal more money than the cost of legal consequences.

If the cynics are right, Merck has a tough road ahead.

Douglas A. McIntyre is an editor at 247wallst.com.