---

# UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSIONWASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

# FORM 10-Q

(Mark One)

| | [ X ] Quarterly Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934
| | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

For the quarterly period ended June 30, 2005

or

| | [    ] Transition Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
| | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

For the transition period from  
        to

# Commission file number
1-1225

# Wyeth

(Exact name of
registrant as specified in its charter)

|Delaware
(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)Five Giralda Farms, Madison, N.J.
(Address of principal executive offices) |  | 13-2526821
(I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)07940(Zip Code)
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | --------------------------------------------------------------

Registrants telephone number,
including area code (973) 660-5000

Indicate by check mark whether the
registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period
that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such
filing requirements for the past 90 days.
      Yes   X

     No

Indicate by check mark whether the
registrant is an accelerated filer (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).
      Yes   X
     No

The number of shares of Common Stock
outstanding as of the close of business on July 29, 2005:

| | Class                             |  | Number of
Shares Outstanding | 
| | --------------------------------- |  | ---------------------------- | 
| | Common Stock, $0.33-1/3 par value |  | 1,341,175,630                | 
| |                                   |  |                              | 
| |                                   |  |                              | 

---

---

# WYETH

# INDEX

| |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       | Page | No.                                                                                             
| | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ---- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| | Part I      -  
           
           
           
           
           
           
           
           
           
           
           
           
           
           
Part II    -  
           
           
           
Signature  
Exhibit Index | Financial Information (Unaudited)

Item 1.       Consolidated Condensed Financial Statements:
              Consolidated Condensed Balance Sheets -
                 June 30, 2005 and December 31,
2004

              Consolidated Condensed Statements of Operations
-
                 Three and Six Months Ended
June 30, 2005
and 2004         
              Consolidated Condensed Statements of Changes in
                 Stockholders' Equity - Six
Months Ended
                 June 30, 2005 and 2004    
              Consolidated Condensed Statements of Cash Flows
-
                 Six Months Ended June 30, 2005
and 2004

              Notes to Consolidated Condensed Financial
Statements

Item 2.       Management's Discussion and Analysis of
                 Financial Condition and
Results of
Operations             
Item 3.       Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk   
Item 4.       Controls and Procedures                                      
Other Information                                                        
Item 1.       Legal Proceedings                                            
Item 4.       Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders          
Item 5.       Other Information                                            
Item 6.       Exhibits |      | 2
   3
   4
   5
   6
 7 - 21
22 - 44
   45
   45
   46
46 - 54
55 - 56
   56
   57
   58
EX - 1
| |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       |      |                                                                                                 
| |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       |      |                                                                                                 

Items other than those listed above
have been omitted because they are not applicable.

# 1

---

# Part I 
Financial Information

# WYETH

The consolidated condensed financial statements
included herein have been prepared by Wyeth (the Company), without audit, pursuant to the
rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Certain information
and footnote disclosures normally included in financial statements prepared in accordance
with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States have been condensed or
omitted pursuant to such rules and regulations; however, the Company believes that the
disclosures are adequate to make the information presented not misleading. In the opinion
of management, the consolidated condensed financial statements reflect all adjustments,
including those that are normal and recurring, considered necessary to present fairly the
financial position of the Company as of June 30, 2005 and December 31, 2004, the results
of its operations for the three and six months ended June 30, 2005 and 2004, and changes
in stockholders equity and cash flows for the six months ended June 30, 2005 and
2004. It is suggested that these consolidated condensed financial statements and
managements discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations
be read in conjunction with the financial statements and the notes thereto included in the
Companys 2004 Annual Report on Form 10-K, Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the
quarter ended March 31, 2005 and information contained in Current Reports on Form 8-K
filed since the filing of the 2004 Form 10-K.

We make available through our Company
Internet website, free of charge, our Company filings with the SEC as soon as reasonably
practicable after we electronically file them with, or furnish them to, the SEC. The
reports we make available include Annual Reports on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form
10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K, proxy statements, registration statements, and any
amendments to those documents. The Companys Internet website is
www.wyeth.com.

2

---

# WYETHCONSOLIDATED CONDENSED
BALANCE SHEETS(In Thousands Except Per Share Amounts)(Unaudited)

|                                                               | June 30,
         2005 | December 31,
        2004
|-------------------------------------------------------------- | ---------------------- | -------------------------
|
|ASSETS                                                         |                        |                          
|Cash and cash equivalents                                      |                        | $  4,778,878             
|Marketable securities                                          |                        | 990,725                  
|Accounts receivable less allowances                            |                        | 2,848,896                
|Inventories:                                                   |                       
|Finished goods                                                 |                        | 733,927                  
|Work in progress                                               |                        | 1,399,085                
|Materials and supplies                                         |                        | 289,506                  
|                                                               |                        |                          
|                                                               |                        | 2,422,518                
|Other current assets including deferred taxes                  |                        | 4,279,572                
|                                                               |                        |                          
|Total Current Assets                                           |                        | 15,320,589               
|Property, plant and equipment                                  |                        | 12,842,815               
|Less accumulated depreciation                                  |                        | 3,589,354                
|                                                               |                        |                          
|                                                               |                        | 9,253,461                
|Goodwill                                                       |                        | 3,844,941                
|Other intangibles, net of accumulated amortization             |                       
|(June 30, 2005-$158,453 and December 31,
2004-$166,827)        |                        | 296,790                  
|Other assets including deferred taxes                          |                        | 5,057,807                
|                                                               |                        |                          
|Total Assets                                                   |                        | $33,773,588              
|                                                               |                        |                          
|LIABILITIES                                                    |                       
|Loans payable                                                  |                        | $         9,115          
|Trade accounts payable                                         |                        | 793,897                  
|Dividends payable                                              |                        | 308,348                  
|Accrued expenses                                               |                        | 8,432,412                
|Accrued taxes                                                  |                        | 331,692                  
|                                                               |                        |                          
|Total Current Liabilities                                      |                        | 9,875,464                
|Long-term debt                                                 |                        | 7,947,029                
|Accrued postretirement benefit obligations other than pensions |                        | 1,064,076                
|Other noncurrent liabilities                                   |                        | 4,132,968                
|                                                               |                        |                          
|Total Liabilities                                              |                        | 23,019,537               
|                                                               |                        |                          
|Contingencies and commitments (Note 5)                         |                       
|STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY                                           |                       
|$2.00 convertible preferred stock, par value $2.50 per share   |                        | 38                       
|Common stock, par value $0.33-1/3 per share                    |                        | 446,859                  
|Additional paid-in capital                                     |                        | 4,989,809                
|Retained earnings                                              |                        | 5,248,319                
|Accumulated other comprehensive income                         |                        | 69,026                   
|                                                               |                        |                          
|Total Stockholders' Equity                                     |                        | 10,754,051               
|                                                               |                        |                          
|Total Liabilities and
Stockholders' Equity                     |                        | $33,773,588              
|                                                               |                        |                          
|                                                               |                       

The accompanying notes are an
integral part of these consolidated condensed financial statements.

3

---

# WYETHCONSOLIDATED CONDENSED
STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS(In Thousands Except Per Share Amounts)(Unaudited)

|                                             | Three Months
           Ended June 30, | Six Months
           Ended June 30,
|-------------------------------------------- | -------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------
|
|Net revenue                                  |                                        | $ 4,713,835                         
|                                             |                                        |                                     
|Cost of goods sold                           |                                        | 1,337,090                           
|Selling, general and administrative expenses |                                        | 1,527,912                           
|Research and development expenses            |                                        | 625,704                             
|Interest expense, net                        |                                        | 17,152                              
|Other income, net                            |                                        | (38,066                             
|                                             |                                        |                                     
|Income before income taxes                   |                                        | 1,244,043                           
|Provision for income taxes                   |                                        | 267,469                             
|                                             |                                        |                                     
|Net income                                   |                                        | $    976,574                        
|                                             |                                        |                                     
|Basic earnings per share                     |                                        | $          0.73                     
|                                             |                                        |                                     
|Diluted earnings per share                   |                                        | $          0.72                     
|                                             |                                        |                                     
|Dividends paid per share of common stock     |                                        | $          0.23                     
|                                             |                                        |                                     
|Dividends declared per share of common stock |                                        | $          0.46                     
|                                             |                                        |                                     
|                                             |                                       

The accompanying notes are an
integral part of these consolidated condensed financial statements.

4

---

# WYETHCONSOLIDATED CONDENSED
STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY (In Thousands Except Per
Share Amounts)(Unaudited)

# Six Months Ended June 30, 2005:

|                                                     | $2.00
Convertible
Preferred
Stock | Common
Stock | Additional
Paid-in
Capital | Retained
Earnings | Accumulated
Other
Comprehensive
Income | Total
Stockholders'
Equity
|---------------------------------------------------- | --------------------------------- | ------------ | -------------------------- | ----------------- | -------------------------------------- | --------------------------
|
|Balance at January 1, 2005                           |                                   | $ 40         |                            | $445,031          |                                        | $4,817,024                
|Net income                                           |                                   |              |                            |                   |                                        |                           
|Currency translation adjustments                     |                                   |              |                            |                   |                                        |                           
|Unrealized gains on derivative
     contracts, net   |                                   |              |                            |                   |                                        |                           
|Unrealized losses on marketable
     securities, net |                                   |              |                            |                   |                                        |                           
|                                                     |                                   |              |                            |                   |                                        |                           
|Comprehensive income, net of tax                     |                                   |              |                            |                   |                                        |                           
|                                                     |                                   |              |                            |                   |                                        |                           
|Cash dividends declared (1)                          |                                   |              |                            |                   |                                        |                           
|Common stock issued for stock options                |                                   |              |                            | 1,735             |                                        | 132,132                   
|Other exchanges                                      |                                   | (2           | )                          | 93                |                                        | 40,653                    
|                                                     |                                   |              |                            |                   |                                        |                           
|Balance at June 30, 2005                             |                                   | $ 38         |                            | $446,859          |                                        | $4,989,809                
|                                                     |                                   |              |                            |                   |                                        |                           

# Six Months Ended June 30,
2004:

|                                                     | $2.00
Convertible
Preferred
Stock | Common
Stock | Additional
Paid-in
Capital | Retained
Earnings | Accumulated
Other
Comprehensive
Loss | Total
Stockholders'
Equity
|---------------------------------------------------- | --------------------------------- | ------------ | -------------------------- | ----------------- | ------------------------------------ | --------------------------
|
|Balance at January 1, 2004                           |                                   | $ 42         |                            | $444,151          |                                      | $4,764,390                
|Net income                                           |                                   |              |                            |                   |                                      |                           
|Currency translation adjustments                     |                                   |              |                            |                   |                                      |                           
|Unrealized gains on derivative
     contracts, net   |                                   |              |                            |                   |                                      |                           
|Unrealized losses on marketable
     securities, net |                                   |              |                            |                   |                                      |                           
|                                                     |                                   |              |                            |                   |                                      |                           
|Comprehensive income, net of tax                     |                                   |              |                            |                   |                                      |                           
|                                                     |                                   |              |                            |                   |                                      |                           
|Cash dividends declared (2)                          |                                   |              |                            |                   |                                      |                           
|Common stock issued for stock options                |                                   |              |                            | 327               |                                      | 25,257                    
|Other exchanges                                      |                                   | (1           | )                          | 94                |                                      | 7,882                     
|                                                     |                                   |              |                            |                   |                                      |                           
|Balance at June 30, 2004                             |                                   | $ 41         |                            | $444,572          |                                      | $4,797,529                
|                                                     |                                   |              |                            |                   |                                      |                           

|(1) | Included
in cash dividends declared were the following dividends payable at June 30, 2005:
|--- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| |  | Common stock cash dividend of $0.23 per share ($308,333 in the aggregate) declared on June
23, 2005 and payable on September 1, 2005; and
| | - | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| |  | Preferred stock cash dividends of $0.50 per share ($15 in the aggregate) declared on April
21, 2005 and paid on July 1, 2005 and declared on June 23, 2005 and payable on October 3,
2005.
| | - | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|(2) | Included
in cash dividends declared were the following dividends payable at June 30, 2004:
|--- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| |  | Common
stock cash dividend of $0.23 per share ($306,755 in the aggregate) declared on June 16,
2004 and paid on September 1, 2004; and
| | - | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| |  | Preferred
stock cash dividends of $0.50 per share ($16 in the aggregate) declared on April 22, 2004
and paid on July 1, 2004 and declared on June 16, 2004 and paid on October 1, 2004.
| | - | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The accompanying notes are an
integral part of these consolidated condensed financial statements.

5

---

# WYETHCONSOLIDATED CONDENSED
STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS(In Thousands)(Unaudited)

|                                                             | Six Months
Ended June 30,
|------------------------------------------------------------ | -------------------------
|
|Operating Activities                                         |                          
|Net income                                                   |                          
|Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash              |                          
|provided by operating activities:                            |                          
|Gains on sales of assets                                     |                          
|Depreciation and amortization                                |                          
|Change in deferred income taxes                              |                          
|Seventh Amendment security fund                              |                          
|Diet drug litigation payments                                |                          
|Changes in working capital, net                              |                          
|Other items, net                                             |                          
|                                                             |                          
|Net cash provided by operating activities                    |                          
|                                                             |                          
|Investing Activities                                         |                          
|Purchases of property, plant and equipment                   |                          
|Proceeds from sales of assets                                |                          
|Purchase of additional equity interest in joint venture      |                          
|Proceeds from sales and maturities of marketable securities  |                          
|Purchases of marketable securities                           |                          
|                                                             |                          
|Net cash provided by (used for) investing activities         |                          
|                                                             |                          
|Financing Activities                                         |                          
|Repayments of long-term debt                                 |                          
|Other borrowing transactions, net                            |                          
|Dividends paid                                               |                          
|Exercises of stock options                                   |                          
|                                                             |                          
|Net cash used for financing activities                       |                          
|                                                             |                          
|Effect of exchange rate changes on cash and cash equivalents |                          
|                                                             |                          
|Increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents             |                          
|Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of period               |                          
|                                                             |                          
|Cash and cash equivalents, end of period                     |                          
|                                                             |                          
|Supplemental Information                                     |                          
|Interest payments                                            |                          
|Income tax payments, net of refunds                          |                          

The accompanying notes are an
integral part of these consolidated condensed financial statements.

6

---

# WYETHNOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS(Unaudited)

# Note 1.        Summary of
Significant Accounting Policies

| | The
following policies are required interim updates to those disclosed in Footnote 1 of the
2004 Annual Report on Form 10-K:
| | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | Stock-Based
Compensation: The Company has four Stock Incentive Plans that it accounts for using
the intrinsic value method in accordance with APB Opinion No. 25, Accounting for Stock
Issued to Employees. All options granted under these plans have an exercise price
equal to the market value of the underlying common stock on the date of grant.
Accordingly, no stock-based employee compensation cost is reflected in net income other
than for the Companys performance share and restricted stock awards. The following
table illustrates the
effect on net income and earnings per share if the Company had applied the fair value
recognition provisions of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS) No. 123, Accounting
for Stock-Based Compensation as amended by SFAS No. 148, Accounting for
Stock-Based Compensation  Transition and Disclosure, Amendment ofSFAS No.
123, to stock-based employee compensation:
| | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

> Three Months
>        Ended June 30,
>      Six Months
>          Ended June 30,(In thousands except per share amounts)
>      2005
>      2004
>      2005
>      2004Net income, as reported
>      
>      $976,574
>         
>      $827,345
>         
>      $2,054,745
>         
>      $1,577,048Add: Stock-based employee compensationexpense included in reported net income,net of tax
>      22,213
>         
>      3,875
>         
>      26,690
>         
>      6,368Deduct: Total stock-based employeecompensaton expense determinedunder fair value-based method for allawards, net of tax
>      (75,968
>         )
>      (76,185
>         )
>      (145,647
>         )
>      (161,328
>         )Adjusted net income
>      $922,819
>         
>      $755,035
>         
>      $1,935,788
>         
>      $1,422,088Earnings per share:Basic - as reported
>      $0.73
>         
>      $0.62
>         
>      $1.54
>         
>      $1.18Basic - adjusted
>      $0.69
>         
>      $0.57
>         
>      $1.45
>         
>      $1.07Diluted - as reported
>      $0.72
>         
>      $0.61
>         
>      $1.52
>         
>      $1.17Diluted - adjusted
>      $0.68
>         
>      $0.56
>         
>      $1.43
>         
>      $1.05

| | On December 16, 2004, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued SFAS No. 123
(revised 2004), Share-BasedPayment(Statement 123R). Statement 123R
replaces SFAS No. 123 and supersedes APB No. 25 and its related implementation guidance.
The Statement requires all share-based payments to employees, including grants of
employee stock options, to be recognized in the statement of operations as compensation
expense (based on their fair values) over the vesting period of the awards. On April 14,
2005, the SEC approved a new rule which delays the effective date of
| | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

7

---

# WYETHNOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS(Unaudited)

| | Statement No. 123R for the Company to January 1, 2006. Currently, the Company discloses the pro forma
expense effect of such grants in the footnotes to the financial statements.
| | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | Based
on recent accounting interpretations, pro forma stock-based compensation expense should
include amounts related to the accelerated amortization of the fair value of options
granted to certain retirement-eligible employees. Currently, the Company recognizes pro
forma stock-based compensation related to retirement-eligible employees over the awards
contractual vesting period. The impact of accelerated vesting on the pro forma
stock-based compensation expense would have resulted in an additional expense of $13.7
million and $19.9 million, both net of tax for the 2005 and 2004 second quarter, respectively, and
a reduction of $3.4 million and $1.2 million, both net of
tax for the 2005 and 2004 first six months. The Company will record the impact of accelerated
vesting for options granted subsequent to January 1, 2006 and continue to provide pro
forma disclosure related to those options granted in prior periods.
| | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | During
the 2005 second quarter, the Company implemented changes in its share-based compensation
programs that included a reduction in the total number of stock options awarded and the
granting of performance share awards and restricted stock unit awards to a broader
employee base. In the past, performance share awards and restricted stock unit awards
were granted only to a limited number of employees, including key executives. The 2005
performance share awards will be converted to shares of common stock based on the
achievement of certain performance criteria related to performance year 2007. The 2005
restricted stock unit awards are converted generally at the end of three years.
| | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | The
Company plans to adopt SFAS No. 123R effective January 1, 2006 using the modified prospective
method which requires companies (1) to record compensation expense for the unvested
portion of previously issued awards that remain outstanding at the initial date of
adoption and (2) to record compensation expense for any awards issued, modified or
settled after the effective date of the statement. The Company expects the adoption of
SFAS No. 123R will have a material impact on the results of operations and earnings per
share beginning in 2006.
| | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | Goodwill
and Other Intangibles:In accordance with SFAS No. 142, Goodwill and Other
Intangible Assets, the changes in the carrying amount of goodwill by reportable
segment for the three and six months ended June 30, 2005 are as follows:
| | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

> (In thousands)
>      Pharmaceuticals
>      Consumer
>  Healthcare
>      Animal
>       Health
>      TotalBalance at December 31, 2004
>      
>      $ 2,728,565
>         
>      $ 593,606
>         
>      $ 534,239
>         
>      $ 3,856,410Additions
>      23,037
>         
>      
>         
>      
>         
>      23,037Currency translation adjustments
>      (32,451
>         )
>      (1,402
>         )
>      (653
>         )
>      (34,506
>         )Balance at June 30, 2005
>      $ 2,719,151
>         
>      $ 592,204
>         
>      $ 533,586
>         
>      $ 3,844,941

8

---

# WYETHNOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS(Unaudited)

| | In
April 2005, the Company increased its ownership in a joint venture with Takeda
Pharmaceutical Company, Limited from 60% to 70%, which, based on a preliminary purchase
price allocation, resulted in additions to Other intangibles, net ofaccumulated
amortization of $38.0 million and Goodwillof $23.0 million.
| | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | Recently
Issued Accounting Standards:In May 2005, the FASB issued SFAS No. 154, Accounting
Changes and Error Corrections, areplacement of APB Opinion No. 20, Accounting
Changes, and Statement No. 3, Reporting Accounting Changes in InterimFinancial
Statements. SFAS No. 154 changes the requirement for the accounting for and reporting
of a change in accounting principle. Previously, most voluntary changes in accounting
principles were required to be recognized by way of a cumulative effect adjustment within
net income during the period of the change. This Statement requires retrospective
application to prior periods financial statements, unless it is impracticable to
determine either the period-specific effects or the cumulative effect of the change. SFAS
No. 154 is effective for accounting changes made in fiscal years beginning after December
15, 2005; however, the Statement does not change the transition provisions of any
existing accounting pronouncements. The Company does not anticipate the adoption of SFAS
No. 154 will have a material effect on its consolidated financial position, results of
operations or cash flows.
| | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

9

---

# WYETHNOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS(Unaudited)

# Note 2.        Earnings per
Share

| | The
following table sets forth the computations of basic earnings per share and diluted
earnings per share:
| | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

> Three
> Months
>        Ended June 30,
>      Six Months
>       Ended June 30,(In thousands except per share
> amounts)
>      2005
>      2004
>      2005
>      2004Net income less preferred dividends
>      
>      $   976,559
>         
>      $   827,329
>         
>      $2,054,722
>         
>      $1,577,024Denominator:Weighted average common shares outstanding
>      1,339,101
>         
>      1,333,505
>         
>      1,337,514
>         
>      1,333,215Basic
> earnings per share
>      $         0.73
>         
>      $         0.62
>         
>      $         1.54
>         
>      $         1.18Numerator:Net income
>      $   976,574
>         
>      $   827,345
>         
>      $2,054,745
>         
>      $1,577,048Interest expense on contingently convertible
> debt(1)
>      4,413
>         
>      952
>         
>      8,477
>         
>      1,962Net
> income, as adjusted
>      $   980,987
>         
>      $   828,297
>         
>      $2,063,222
>         
>      $1,579,010Denominator:Weighted average common shares outstanding
>      1,339,101
>         
>      1,333,505
>         
>      1,337,514
>         
>      1,333,215Common stock equivalents of outstanding stockoptions, deferred contingent common
> stockawards, restricted stock awards andconvertible preferred stock(2)
>      5,839
>         
>      3,646
>         
>      5,091
>         
>      4,232Common stock equivalents of assumed conversionof contingently convertible debt(1)
>      16,890
>         
>      16,890
>         
>      16,890
>         
>      16,890Total
> shares(2)
>      1,361,830
>         
>      1,354,041
>         
>      1,359,495
>         
>      1,354,337Diluted
> earnings per share(1)(2)
>      $         0.72
>         
>      $         0.61
>         
>      $         1.52
>         
>      $         1.17

| | (1) | Diluted
earnings per share reflects the impact of Emerging Issues Task Force Issue No. 04-8 (EITF
No. 04-8), Accounting Issues Related to Certain Features of Contingently Convertible
Debt and the Effect onDiluted Earnings per Share, which requires the
inclusion of the dilutive effect from contingently convertible debt instruments with
market price contingencies in the calculation of diluted earnings per share (EPS).
Accordingly, interest expense on the Companys contingently convertible debt, net of
capitalized interest and taxes, is added back to reported net income, and the additional
common shares (assuming conversion) are included in total shares outstanding for purposes
of calculating diluted EPS. In accordance with EITF No. 04-8, which is effective for all
periods ending after December 15, 2004 with restatement of previously reported diluted
EPS calculations, the 2004 second quarter and first six months diluted EPS each have been
restated to reflect a $0.01 dilution as a result of the application of this Issue.
The sum of the 2004 first quarter and second quarter diluted earnings per share does not
add to year-to-date earnings per share due to rounding.
| | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | (2) | At
June 30, 2005 and 2004, approximately 100,002 and 128,502 of common shares,
          respectively, related to options outstanding under the Companys Stock
          Incentive Plans were excluded from the computation of diluted earnings per
          share, as the effect would have been antidilutive.
| | --- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

10

---

# WYETHNOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS(Unaudited)

# Note 3.        Marketable
Securities

| | The
Company has marketable debt and equity securities, which are classified as either
available-for-sale or held-to-maturity, depending on managements investment
intentions at the time of purchase relating to these securities.
| | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | The
cost, gross unrealized gains (losses) and fair value of available-for-sale and
held-to-maturity securities by major security type at June 30, 2005 and December 31, 2004
were as follows:
| | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

> (In thousands)
> At June 30, 2005
>      Cost
>      Gross
>  Unrealized     Gains
>      Gross
>  Unrealized    (Losses)
>      Fair
>      ValueAvailable-for-sale:U.S. Treasury securities
> 
>      $     20,074
>         
>      $        
>         
>      $         (303
>         )
>      $     19,771Certificates of deposit
> 
>      4,245
>         
>      
>         
>      
>         
>      4,245Corporate debt securities
> 
>      203,189
>         
>      139
>         
>      (304
>         )
>      203,024Mortgage-backed securities
> 
>      10,208
>         
>      24
>         
>      
>         
>      10,232Other debt securities
> 
>      2,475
>         
>      
>         
>      (4
>         )
>      2,471Equity securities
>      48,148
>         
>      7,761
>         
>      (12,614
>         )
>      43,295Institutional fixed income fund
> 
>      343,048
>         
>      10,609
>         
>      (2,208
>         )
>      351,449Total available-for-sale
>      631,387
>         
>      18,533
>         
>      (15,433
>         )
>      634,487Held-to-maturity:Commercial paper
>      356,238
>         
>      
>         
>      
>         
>      356,238$   987,625
>         
>      $ 18,533
>         
>      $    (15,433
>         )
>      $   990,725(In thousands)
> At December 31, 2004
>      Cost
>      Gross
>  Unrealized     Gains
>      Gross
>  Unrealized    (Losses)
>      Fair
>      ValueAvailable-for-sale:U.S. Treasury securities
> 
>      $     60,439
>         
>      $        
>         
>      $         (286
>         )
>      $     60,153Commercial paper
>      32,597
>         
>      
>         
>      
>         
>      32,597Certificates of deposit
> 
>      54,867
>         
>      3
>         
>      (52
>         )
>      54,818Corporate debt securities
> 
>      485,007
>         
>      130
>         
>      (528
>         )
>      484,609Asset-backed securities
> 
>      258,543
>         
>      15
>         
>      (166
>         )
>      258,392Mortgage-backed securities
> 
>      77,983
>         
>      4
>         
>      (67
>         )
>      77,920Other debt securities
> 
>      2,469
>         
>      
>         
>      (12
>         )
>      2,457Equity securities
>      48,264
>         
>      8,998
>         
>      (6,918
>         )
>      50,344Institutional fixed income fund
> 
>      531,929
>         
>      16,713
>         
>      
>         
>      548,642Total available-for-sale
>      1,552,098
>         
>      25,863
>         
>      (8,029
>         )
>      1,569,932Held-to-maturity:Commercial paper
>      175,626
>         
>      
>         
>      
>         
>      175,626$1,727,724
>         
>      $ 25,863
>         
>      $     (8,029
>         )
>      $1,745,558

11

---

# WYETHNOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS(Unaudited)

| | The
contractual maturities of debt securities classified as available-for-sale at June 30,
2005 were as follows:
| | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

> (In thousands)
>      Cost
>      Fair
>       ValueAvailable-for-sale:Due within one year
> 
>      $102,181
>         
>      $101,925Due after one year through five years
>      123,612
>         
>      123,386Due after five years through 10 years
>      1,056
>         
>      1,050Due after 10 years
> 
>      13,342
>         
>      13,382$240,191
>         
>      $239,743

| | All
held-to-maturity debt securities are due within one year and had aggregate fair values of
$356.2 million at June 30, 2005.
| | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

# Note 4.       Pensions and
Other Postretirement Benefits

| | Net
periodic benefit cost for the Companys defined benefit plans for the three and six
months ended June 30, 2005 and 2004 (principally for the U.S.) was as follows:
| | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

> PensionsThree Months
>           Ended June 30,
>      Six Months
>          Ended June 30,(In thousands)
> Components of Net Periodic Benefit Cost
>      2005
>      2004
>      2005
>      2004Service cost
>      
>      $ 41,603
>         
>      $ 38,172
>         
>      $   83,572
>         
>      $   73,543Interest cost
>      67,594
>         
>      65,896
>         
>      133,853
>         
>      128,189Expected return on plan assets
>      (86,084
>         )
>      (78,843
>         )
>      (168,815
>         )
>      (155,147
>         )Amortization of prior service cost
>      2,151
>         
>      2,834
>         
>      4,297
>         
>      5,677Amortization of transition obligation
> 
>      279
>         
>      (405
>         )
>      566
>         
>      (827
>         )Recognized net actuarial loss
>      28,031
>         
>      27,691
>         
>      53,919
>         
>      50,154Net periodic benefit cost
>      $ 53,574
>         
>      $ 55,345
>         
>      $ 107,392
>         
>      $ 101,589

> Other Postretirement BenefitsThree Months
>           Ended June 30,
>      Six Months
>          Ended June 30,(In thousands)
> Components of Net Periodic Benefit Cost
>      2005
>      2004
>      2005
>      2004Service cost
>      
>      $ 12,250
>         
>      $ 10,550
>         
>      $ 24,505
>         
>      $ 21,695Interest cost
>      25,739
>         
>      22,613
>         
>      51,487
>         
>      46,173Amortization of prior service cost
>      (5,232
>         )
>      (4,478
>         )
>      (10,463
>         )
>      (8,187
>         )Recognized net actuarial loss
>      12,033
>         
>      3,771
>         
>      24,070
>         
>      11,611Net periodic benefit cost
>      $ 44,790
>         
>      $ 32,456
>         
>      $ 89,599
>         
>      $ 71,292

12

---

# WYETHNOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS(Unaudited)

| | As
of June 30, 2005, $43.2 million and $49.7 million of contributions have been made in 2005
to the Companys defined benefit pension plans and other postretirement benefit
plans, respectively. The Company presently anticipates total contributions to be made
during 2005 to fund its defined benefit pension and other postretirement benefit plans
will approximate $200.0 million and $110.0 million, respectively.
| | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

# Note 5.       Contingencies
and Commitments

| | The
Company is involved in various legal proceedings, including product liability and
environmental matters, of a nature considered normal to its business. It is the Companys
policy to accrue for amounts related to these legal matters if it is probable that a
liability has been incurred and an amount is reasonably estimable.
| | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | In
the opinion of the Company, although the outcome of any legal proceedings cannot be
predicted with certainty, the ultimate liability of the Company in connection with its
legal proceedings (other than the diet drug litigation discussed immediately below) will
not have a material adverse effect on the Companys financial position but could be
material to the results of operations or cash flows in any one accounting period.
| | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | Diet Drug Litigation
| | --------------------

| | The
Company has been named as a defendant in numerous legal actions relating to the diet
drugs PONDIMIN (which in combination with phentermine, a product that was not
manufactured, distributed or sold by the Company, was commonly referred to as fen-phen)
or REDUX, which the Company estimated were used in the United States, prior to
their 1997 voluntary market withdrawal, by approximately 5.8 million people. These
actions allege, among other things, that the use of REDUX and/or PONDIMIN,
independently or in combination with phentermine, caused certain serious conditions,
including valvular heart disease and primary pulmonary hypertension (PPH). The REDUX and
PONDIMIN litigation is described in additional detail in the Companys Annual
Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004.
| | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | On
October 7, 1999, the Company announced a nationwide class action settlement (the
settlement) to resolve litigation brought against the Company regarding the use of the
diet drugs REDUX or PONDIMIN. The settlement covered all claims arising out
of the use of REDUX or PONDIMIN, except for PPH claims, and was open to all
REDUX or PONDIMIN users in the United States. As originally designed, the
settlement was administered by an independent Settlement Trust and comprised of two
settlement funds. Fund A (with a value at the time of settlement of $1,000.0 million plus
$200.0 million for legal fees) was created to cover refunds, medical screening costs,
additional medical services and cash payments, education and research costs, and
administration costs. Fund A has been fully funded by contributions by the Company. Fund
B (which was to be funded by the Company on an as-needed basis up to a total of $2,550.0
million) would compensate claimants with significant heart valve disease depending upon
their age and the severity of their condition according to a five-level settlement
matrix. The two funds
| | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

13

---

# WYETHNOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS(Unaudited)

| | have
now been combined into a single fund. Total diet drug litigation payments were $301.5
million and $591.1 million for the 2005 second quarter and first six months,
respectively, of which, $65.7 million and $161.7 million for the 2005 second quarter and
first six months, respectively, were made in connection with the nationwide settlement
(including the proposed Seventh Amendment, as discussed below). Payments under the
national settlement may continue, if necessary, until 2018.
| | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | In
2004, the Company increased its reserves in connection with the REDUX and PONDIMIN diet
drug matters by $4,500.0 million, bringing the total of the charges taken to date to
$21,100.0 million. The $6,575.2 million reserve balance at June 30, 2005 represents
managements best estimate, within a range of outcomes, of the aggregate amount
required to cover diet drug litigation costs, including payments in connection with the
nationwide settlement (as it would be amended by the proposed Seventh Amendment,
discussed below), initial opt outs, PPH claims, downstream opt out cases and the Companys
legal fees related to the diet drug litigation. The current reserve takes into account
the terms of the proposed Seventh Amendment, the Companys settlement discussions
with plaintiffs attorneys representing a number of individuals who have opted out
of the nationwide settlement, its experiences with the downstream opt out cases that have
been litigated or settled to date and its projected expenses in connection with the diet
drug litigation. However, due to the need for final appellate court approval of the
proposed Seventh Amendment, the
uncertainty of the Companys ability to consummate settlements with the downstream
opt out plaintiffs, the number and amount of any future verdicts that may be returned in
downstream opt out and PPH litigation, and the inherent uncertainty surrounding any
litigation, it is possible that additional reserves may be required in the future and the
amount of such additional reserves may be significant.
| | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | The
Company intends to vigorously defend itself and believes it can marshal significant
resources and legal defenses to limit its ultimate liability in the diet drug litigation.
However, in light of the circumstances discussed above, it is not possible to predict the
ultimate liability of the Company in connection with its diet drug legal proceedings. It
is therefore not possible to predict whether, and if so when, such proceedings will have
a material adverse effect on the Companys financial condition, results of
operations and/or cash flows and whether cash flows from operating activities and
existing and prospective financing resources will be adequate to fund the Companys
operations, pay all liabilities related to the diet drug litigation, pay dividends,
maintain the ongoing programs of capital expenditures, and repay both the principal and
interest on its outstanding obligations without the disposition of significant strategic
core assets and/or reductions in certain cash outflows.
| | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | Seventh Amendment to the Nationwide Settlement
| | ----------------------------------------------

| | During
2004, the Company, counsel for the plaintiff class in the nationwide settlement and
counsel for certain individual class members negotiated a proposed Seventh Amendment to
the settlement agreement that would create a new claims processing structure, funding
arrangement and payment schedule for claims for compensation based on Levels I and II of
the five-level settlement matrix. These claims are the most
| | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

14

---

# WYETHNOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS(Unaudited)

| | numerous,
but least serious, of the claims filed for matrix benefits. The total number of currently
filed Level I and Level II claims posed the risk that the Settlement Trusts funds
might be exhausted.
| | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | On
March 15, 2005, United States District Judge Harvey Bartle III, the federal judge of the
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania overseeing the
national class action settlement, approved the proposed Seventh Amendment as fair,
adequate and reasonable. Three appeals from Judge Bartles decision were filed
by April 14, 2005, the deadline for such appeals. Two of those appeals have now been
withdrawn by the appellants who brought them and the Company and counsel for the
plaintiff class have filed a joint motion to remand the claim of the remaining appellant
to the District Court. When and if all appeals are finally resolved, the proposed
Seventh Amendment would include the following key terms:
| | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | o | The
amendment would create a new Supplemental Fund, to be administered by a Fund
Administrator who will be appointed by the District Court and who will process most
pending Level I and Level II matrix claims;
| | - | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | o | After
District Court approval, the Company became obligated to make initial payments of up to
$50.0 million (of which $25.0 million has been paid) to facilitate the establishment of
the Supplemental Fund and to enable the Supplemental Fund to begin reviewing claims.
Following affirmance by the Third Circuit of the District Courts approval and the
exhaustion of any further appellate review, the Company would make an initial payment of
$400.0 million to enable the Supplemental Fund to begin paying claims. The timing of
additional payments would be dictated by the rate of review and payment of claims by the
Fund Administrator. The Company would ultimately deposit a total of $1,275.0 million, net
of certain credits, into the Supplemental Fund;
| | - | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | o | All
participating matrix Level I and Level II claimants who qualify under the Seventh
Amendment, who pass the Settlement Funds medical review and who otherwise satisfy
the requirements of the settlement (Category One class members) would receive a pro rata
share of the $1,275.0 million Supplemental Fund, after deduction of certain expenses and
other amounts from the Supplemental Fund. The pro rata amount would vary depending upon
the number of claimants who pass medical review, the nature of their claims, their age
and other factors. A participating Category One class member who does not qualify for a
payment after such medical review would be paid $2,000 from the Supplemental Fund;
| | - | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | o | Participating
class members who might in the future have been eligible to file Level I and Level II
matrix claims (Category Two class members) would be eligible to receive a $2,000 payment
from the Trust; such payments would be funded by the Company apart from its other funding
obligations under the nationwide settlement;
| | - | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | o | If
the participants in the Seventh Amendment have heart valve surgery or other more serious
medical conditions on Levels III through V of the nationwide settlement matrix by the
earlier of 15 years from the date of their last diet drug
| | - | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

15

---

# WYETHNOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS(Unaudited)

| |  | ingestion or
by December 31, 2011, they would remain eligible to submit claims to the existing Trust
and be paid the current matrix amounts if they qualify for such payments under terms
modified by the Seventh Amendment. In the event the existing Trust is unable to pay those
claims, the Company would guarantee payment; and
| |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | o | All
class members who participate in the Seventh Amendment would give up any further opt out
rights as well as the right to challenge the terms of and the binding effect of the
nationwide settlement. Final approval of the Seventh Amendment also would preclude any
lawsuits by the Trust or the Company to recover any amounts previously paid to class
members by the Trust, as well as terminate the Claims Integrity Program (discussed below)
as to all claimants who do not opt out of the Seventh Amendment.
| | - | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | On
March 29, 2005, as collateral for the Companys financial obligations under the
Seventh Amendment, the Company established a security fund in the amount of $1,250.0
million. As of June 30, 2005, $1,050.0 million was included in Othercurrent
assets including deferred taxes and $200.0 million was included in Other assets
including deferred taxes. The amounts in the security fund are owned by the Company
and will earn interest income for the Company while residing in the security fund.
| | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | There
can be no assurance that the proposed Seventh Amendment will be upheld on appeal. If it
is upheld on appeal, only the claims of those class members who opted out of the Seventh
Amendment will be processed under the terms of the existing settlement agreement and
under the procedures that have been adopted by the Settlement Trust and the District
Court. Less than 5% of the class members who would be affected by the proposed Seventh
Amendment (approximately 1,900 of the Category One class members and approximately 5,100
of the Category Two class members) elected to opt out of the Seventh Amendment and to
remain bound by the current settlement terms. Should the proposed Seventh Amendment not
be upheld on appeal, all of the pending and future matrix claims would be processed under
the terms of the existing settlement agreement.
| | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | Nationwide Settlement Matrix Claims Data
| | ----------------------------------------

| | The
settlement agreement grants the Company access to claims data maintained by the
Settlement Trust. Based on its review of that data, the Company understands that, as of
July 6, 2005, the Trust had recorded approximately 121,580 matrix claim forms.
Approximately 33,400 of these forms were so deficient, incomplete or duplicative of other
forms filed by the same claimant that, in the Companys view, it is unlikely that a
significant number of these forms will result in further claims processing.
| | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | The
Companys understanding of the status of the remaining approximately 88,180 forms,
based on its analysis of data received from the Trust through July 6, 2005, is as
follows. Approximately 25,660 of the matrix claims had been processed to completion, with
those claims either paid (approximately 4,200 payments, totaling $1,507.0 million, had
been made to approximately 4,010 claimants), denied or in show cause proceedings
(approximately 19,880) or withdrawn. Approximately 2,150 claims were in some stage
| | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

16

---

# WYETHNOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS(Unaudited)

| | of
the 100% audit process ordered in late 2002 by the District Court overseeing the national
settlement. An additional approximately 18,265 claims alleged conditions that, if true,
would entitle the claimant to receive a matrix award; these claims had not yet entered
the audit process. Another approximately 24,035 claims with similar allegations have been
purportedly substantiated by physicians or filed by law firms whose claims are now
subject to the outcome of the Trusts Claims Integrity Program.(1) Approximately
17,965 claim forms did not contain sufficient information even to assert a matrix claim,
although some of those claim forms could be made complete by the submission of additional
information and could therefore become eligible to proceed to audit in the future. The
remaining approximately 105 claims were in the data entry process and could not be
assessed.
| | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | Challenges to the Nationwide Settlement
| | ---------------------------------------

| | Counsel
representing approximately 8,600 class members have filed a motion with the District
Court seeking a ruling that the nationwide settlement agreement is void. The motion
asserts that there was inadequate representation of the class when the settlement
agreement was negotiated, that the parties and their experts made mutual mistakes in
projecting the amount of money that would be needed to pay all valid claims, that the
original notice to the class was inadequate and that the Court had lacked subject matter
jurisdiction over some of the class members claims. The motion seeks an opportunity
for all class members to decide a second time whether or not to be included in the class
and therefore bound by the settlement agreement. The District Court had stayed briefing
and consideration of the motion pending its decision on approval of the proposed Seventh
Amendment, which as discussed above would preclude such claims on behalf of class members
who participate. Briefing on the motion is now scheduled to be completed by the third
quarter 2005.
| | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | Certain
class members also have filed a number of other motions and lawsuits attacking both the
binding effect of the settlement and the administration of the Trust, some of which have
been decided against class members and currently are on appeal. The Company cannot
predict the outcome of any of these motions or lawsuits.
| | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | Downstream Opt Out Cases
| | ------------------------

| | As
of June 30, 2005, approximately 62,000 individuals who had filed Intermediate or Back-End
opt out forms had pending lawsuits against the Company. The claims of approximately 46%
of the plaintiffs in the Intermediate and Back-End opt out cases served on the Company
are pending in Federal Court, with approximately 39% pending in State Courts. The claims
of approximately 15% of the Intermediate and Back-End opt out plaintiffs have been
removed from State Courts to Federal Court but are still subject to a possible remand to
State Court. In addition, a large number of plaintiffs have asked the U.S. Court of
Appeals for the Third Circuit to review and reverse orders entered by the Federal Court
overseeing the settlement which had denied the plaintiffs motions to remand their
cases to State Court. As of June 30, 2005, approximately 3,100 Intermediate or Back-End
opt out plaintiffs have had their lawsuits dismissed for procedural or medical
deficiencies or for various other reasons.
| | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

17

---

# WYETHNOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS(Unaudited)

| | The
claims of 18 class members who had taken advantage of the Intermediate and Back-End opt
out rights created in the nationwide settlement went to verdict from January 1 through
June 30, 2005. In three separate trials bifurcated to consider medical causation and
damages in the first phase and liability in the second phase, verdicts were returned in
favor of a total of seven plaintiffs, in the aggregate amount of approximately $840,000,
at the close of the initial stage of each trial. Those cases have since been settled.
Seven of the verdicts were defense verdicts in favor of the Company at the close of the
initial phase in similarly bifurcated trials. Two verdicts involved cases in which the
jury initially found in favor of the plaintiffs for $5.0 million and $500,000
respectively, but subsequently found for the Company during the liability phase, thereby
negating the earlier damage finding. Verdicts of $100.0 million each were returned in
favor of the remaining two plaintiffs at the close of the first phase of a similarly
bifurcated trial. The Company moved for a mistrial following the return of the $100.0
million verdicts and the second phase was postponed until July 25, 2005. The mistrial
motion has been fully briefed but not yet decided. The second phase of that trial was
subsequently postponed again to October 2005. Also during this period, the Philadelphia
Court of Common Pleas set aside an earlier verdict against the Company and in favor of
three plaintiffs in the aggregate amount of $1.355 million. The court ordered a new trial
of the second, or liability, phase of that case after determining that the testimony of
plaintiffs only liability expert witness was inadequate and in violation of the
Pennsylvania Rules of Evidence. A number of additional cases were settled, dismissed or
adjourned during the first half of 2005. Additional Intermediate and Back-End opt out
trials are scheduled throughout 2005 and 2006.
| | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | On
January 18, 2005, the Company and counsel representing certain downstream opt out
plaintiffs filed a motion with the District Court advising the Court that those parties
had developed a proposed process by which large numbers of the downstream opt out cases
might be negotiated and settled. The proposed process provides a methodology for valuing
different categories of claims and also provides a structure for individualized
negotiations between Wyeth and lawyers representing diet drug claimants. Counsel for
greater than 90% of the plaintiffs with pending Intermediate and Back-End Opt Out
lawsuits have agreed to participate in the process or are otherwise engaged in settlement
discussions with the Company. Some of these discussions have resulted in settlement
agreements, while other such discussions remain at a preliminary stage. The Company
cannot predict the number of cases that might be settled as a result of this process.
| | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | PPH Cases
| | ---------

| | On
April 27, 2004, a jury in Beaumont, Texas hearing the case of Coffey, et al. v. Wyeth,
et al., No. E-167,334, 172nd Judicial District Court, Jefferson Cty., TX, returned a
verdict in favor of the plaintiffs for $113.4 million in compensatory damages and $900.0
million in punitive damages for the wrongful death of the plaintiffs decedent,
allegedly as a result of PPH caused by her use of PONDIMIN. On May 17, 2004, the
Trial Court entered judgment on behalf of the plaintiffs for the full amount of the jurys
verdict, as well as $4.2 million in pre-judgment interest and $188,737 in guardian ad
litem fees. On
| | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

18

---

# WYETHNOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS(Unaudited)

| | July
26, 2004, the Trial Court denied in their entirety the Companys motions for a new
trial or for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, including the Companys request
for application of Texass statutory cap on punitive damage awards. The Company has
filed an appeal from the judgment entered by the Trial Court and believes that it has
strong arguments for reversal or reduction of the awards on appeal due to the significant
number of legal errors made during trial and in the charge to the jury and due to a lack
of evidence to support aspects of the verdict. In connection with its appeal, the Company
was required by Texas law to post a bond in the amount of $25.0 million. The Company
filed its brief in support of the appeal on April 14, 2005. Oral argument is not expected
until late 2005 or early 2006.
| | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | As
of June 30, 2005, the Company was a defendant in approximately 357 pending lawsuits in
which the plaintiff alleges a claim of PPH, alone or with other alleged injuries. Almost
all of these claimants must meet the definition of PPH set forth in the national
settlement agreement in order to pursue their claims outside of the national settlement
(payment of such claims, by settlement or judgment, would be made by the Company and not
by the Trust). Approximately 83 of these cases appear to be eligible to pursue a PPH
lawsuit under the terms of the national settlement. In approximately 160 of these cases,
the Company has filed or expects to file motions under the terms of the national
settlement to preclude plaintiffs from proceeding with their PPH claims. For the balance
of these cases, the Company currently has insufficient medical information to assess
whether or not the plaintiffs meet the definition of PPH under the national settlement.
The Company is aware of approximately 11 additional claims which are not currently the
subject of a PPH lawsuit but which appear to meet the settlements PPH definition.
During the course of settlement discussions, certain plaintiffs attorneys have
informed the Company that they represent additional individuals who claim to have PPH,
but the Company is unable to evaluate whether any such purported cases of PPH would meet
the national settlement agreements definition of PPH. The Company continues to work
toward resolving the claims of individuals who allege that they have developed PPH as a
result of their use of the diet drugs and intends to vigorously defend those PPH cases
that cannot be resolved prior to trial.
| | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | (1) | Pursuant to its Claims Integrity Program, the Settlement Trust has required
          additional information concerning matrix claims purportedly substantiated by 18
          identified physicians or filed by two law firms in order to determine whether to
          permit those claims to proceed to the 100% audit process established by the
          District Court. Based upon data obtained from the Trust, the Company believes
          that approximately 24,035 matrix claims were purportedly substantiated by the 18
          physicians and/or filed by the two law firms covered by the Claims Integrity
          Program as of July 6, 2005. It is the Companys understanding that
          additional claims substantiated by additional physicians or filed by additional
          law firms might be subjected to the same requirements of the Claims Integrity
          Program in the future. The ultimate disposition of any or all claims that are
          subject to the Claims Integrity Program is at this time uncertain. Counsel for
          certain claimants affected by the program have challenged the Trusts
          authority to implement the Claims Integrity Program and to require completion of
          the questionnaire before determining whether to permit those claims to proceed
          to audit. While that motion was denied by the Court, additional challenges to
          the Claims Integrity Program and to the Trusts matrix claim processing
          have been filed. As indicated
          above, following final judicial approval of the Seventh Amendment, the Claims
          Integrity Program will be terminated as to all claimants who have not opted out
          of the Seventh Amendment. The Trust has also instituted civil litigation
          alleging fraud on the part of two physicians who substantiated matrix
          claims.  If the proposed Seventh Amendment receives final approval, those lawsuits
          will be dismissed.
| | --- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

19

---

# WYETHNOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS(Unaudited)

# Note 6.        Company Data by
Segment

| | The
Company has four reportable segments: Wyeth Pharmaceuticals (Pharmaceuticals), Wyeth
Consumer Healthcare (Consumer Healthcare), Fort Dodge Animal Health (Animal Health) and
Corporate. The Companys Pharmaceuticals, Consumer Healthcare and Animal Health
reportable segments are strategic business units that offer different products and
services. The reportable segments are managed separately because they manufacture,
distribute and sell distinct products and provide services that require differing
technologies and marketing strategies. The Companys Corporate segment is
responsible for the treasury, tax and legal operations of the Companys businesses
and maintains and/or incurs certain assets, liabilities, income, expense, gains and
losses related to the overall management of the Company which are not allocated to the
other reportable segments.
| | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

> Net RevenueThree Months
>                  
>                 Ended June 30,
>      Six Months
>                   
>                 Ended June 30,(In thousands)
> Segment
>      2005
>      2004
>      2005
>      2004Pharmaceuticals(1)
>      
>      $3,869,022
>         
>      $3,392,977
>         
>      $7,586,491
>         
>      $6,600,563Consumer Healthcare
>      600,050
>         
>      591,402
>         
>      1,216,840
>         
>      1,179,753Animal Health
>      244,763
>         
>      238,826
>         
>      489,502
>         
>      457,678Total(2)
>      $4,713,835
>         
>      $4,223,205
>         
>      $9,292,833
>         
>      $8,237,994

> Income (Loss) Before Income TaxesThree Months
>                  
>                 Ended June 30,
>      Six Months
>                   
>                 Ended June 30,(In thousands)
> Segment
>      2005
>      2004
>      2005
>      2004Pharmaceuticals(1)
>      
>      $ 1,185,070
>         
>      $    965,840
>         
>      $ 2,423,602
>         
>      $ 1,837,953Consumer Healthcare
>      97,674
>         
>      104,635
>         
>      218,814
>         
>      214,093Animal Health
>      61,593
>         
>      50,341
>         
>      112,782
>         
>      88,035Corporate
>      (100,294
>         )
>      (57,738
>         )
>      (137,689
>         )
>      (133,112
>         )Total(2)
>      $ 1,244,043
>         
>      $ 1,063,078
>         
>      $ 2,617,509
>         
>      $ 2,006,969

| | (1) | Pharmaceuticals
for the 2004 first half included a first quarter charge of           $145,500 within Research
and development expenses related to the upfront           payment to Solvay
Pharmaceuticals in connection with the co-development and           co-commercialization
of four neuroscience compounds, most notably, bifeprunox, a           late stage compound
in Phase 3 development for schizophrenia and other possible           uses.
| | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | (2) | Income
before income taxes included approximately $4,500 and $143,000 for the           2005
second quarter and first half, respectively, and $12,900 and $153,600 for           the
2004 second quarter and first half, respectively, related to gains from the
          divestiture of certain Pharmaceuticals and Consumer Healthcare products. The
          2005 divestitures included product rights to SYNVISC and EPOCLER          (in
Brazil). The 2004 divestitures included product rights to indiplon, DIAMOX (in
Japan), and the Companys nutritionals products in           France.
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

20

---

# WYETHNOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS(Unaudited)

# Note 7.       
Subsequent Event

| | In
August 2005, the Company replaced its $1,350.0 million three-year facility scheduled to
mature on March 3, 2006, with a new $1,350.0 million five-year facility. The new facility
contains substantially the same financial and other covenants, representations,
warranties, conditions and default provisions as the replaced facility.
| | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | In
addition, the Company amended its existing $1,747.5 million five-year facility which
matures on February 11, 2009 to conform to the terms and conditions (other than maturity)
of the new facility.
| | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

21

---

# Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Conditionand Results of
OperationsThree Months and Six Months Ended June 30, 2005

# Item 2.        Results of
Operations

| | Overview
| | --------

| | Wyeth
is one of the worlds largest research-based pharmaceutical and health care products
companies and is a leader in the discovery, development, manufacturing and marketing of
pharmaceuticals, biologicals, vaccines, non-prescription medicines and animal health
care. The Company has four reportable segments: Wyeth Pharmaceuticals (Pharmaceuticals),
Wyeth Consumer Healthcare (Consumer Healthcare), Fort Dodge Animal Health (Animal Health)
and Corporate, which are managed separately because they manufacture, distribute and sell
distinct products and provide services which require differing technologies and marketing
strategies. These segments reflect how senior management reviews the business, makes
investing and resource allocation decisions, and assesses operating performance.
| | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | Our
Pharmaceuticals segment, which provided 82% of our worldwide net revenue for the first
half of 2005 and 80% for the first half of 2004, manufactures, distributes and sells
branded human ethical pharmaceuticals, biologicals and nutritionals. Principal products
include neuroscience therapies, cardiovascular products, nutritionals, gastroenterology
drugs, anti-infectives, vaccines, oncology therapies, musculoskeletal therapies,
hemophilia treatments, immunology products and womens health care products. These
products are promoted and sold worldwide primarily to wholesalers, pharmacies, hospitals,
physicians, retailers and other human health care institutions.
| | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | The
Consumer Healthcare segment, which provided approximately 13% of our worldwide net
revenue for the first half of 2005 and 14% for the first half of 2004, manufactures,
distributes and sells over-the-counter health care products, which include analgesics,
cough/cold/allergy remedies, nutritional supplements, and hemorrhoidal, asthma and
personal care items. These products generally are sold to wholesalers and retailers and
are promoted primarily to consumers worldwide through advertising.
| | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | Our
Animal Health segment, which provided 5% of our worldwide net revenue for the first half
of 2005 and 6% for the first half of 2004, manufactures, distributes, and sells animal
biological and pharmaceutical products, including vaccines, pharmaceuticals, parasite
control and growth implants. These products are sold to wholesalers, retailers,
veterinarians and other animal health care institutions.
| | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | The
Corporate segment is responsible for the treasury, tax and legal operations of the Companys
businesses. It maintains and/or incurs certain assets, liabilities, income, expenses,
gains and losses related to the overall management of the Company that are not allocated
to the other reportable segments.
| | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | Wyeth
exhibited strong revenue growth for the 2005 first half, achieving a 13% increase in
worldwide net revenue compared with the first half of 2004.
| | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

22

---

# Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Conditionand Results of
OperationsThree Months and Six Months Ended June 30, 2005

| | Pharmaceuticals
had net revenue of $7,586.5 million for the 2005 first half, representing growth of 15%
over the 2004 first half, which was driven by the strong performance of several key
products:
| | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | o | EFFEXOR(a neuroscience therapy)  up 9% to $1,757.2 million
| | - | -----------------------------------------------------------

| | o | PROTONIX(a gastroenterology product)  up 8% to $863.3 million
| | - | --------------------------------------------------------------

| | o | PREVNAR(a vaccine)  up 82% to $714.4 million
| | - | ---------------------------------------------

| | o | ENBREL(a musculoskeletal therapy)  up 75% (internationally, where the Company has
exclusive marketing rights) to $509.3 million
| | - | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | o | ZOSYN/TAZOCIN(an infectious disease drug) - up 26% to $459.9 million
| | - | --------------------------------------------------------------------

| | o | RAPAMUNE(an immunology product) - up 25% to $143.3 million
| | - | ----------------------------------------------------------

| | Collectively,
sales of these products increased 25% for the first half of 2005 compared with the first
half of 2004.
| | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | In
September 2004, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) issued an
updated recommendation for the use of PREVNAR reinstating the full, four-dose
vaccination schedule. In August 2004, the European Medicines Agency (EMEA) and Committee
for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) announced a return to the normal dosing
schedule for PREVNAR in Europe. First half net revenue growth for PREVNAR reflected
a return to the full dose vaccination schedule, the resolution of manufacturing issues
that limited production in the first half of 2004 and a catch-up of deferred doses from
last year that resulted from supply constraints.
| | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | PROTONIXnet revenue for the first half of 2005 of $863.3 million increased 8% from the first
half of 2004. We are shifting emphasis of the PROTONIX business from the more
heavily discounted Medicaid segment to the less heavily discounted third party managed
care segment. This strategy, which is expected to continue throughout 2005, has had a
positive impact on net revenue and profitability.
| | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | Other
areas of revenue growth for the Pharmaceuticals segment for the 2005 first half included
nutritionals, BENEFIXand rhBMP-2, as well as alliance revenue,
predominantly from sales of ENBREL (in North America).
| | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | EFFEXOR revenue
growth is moderating, reflecting several factors. The antidepressant category is maturing
and growth overall has slowed. In addition, negative publicity regarding antidepressants
and increased concern about the use of these products in children and adolescents has had
an impact. In late 2004, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) directed all
manufacturers of antidepressant medications to implement labeling changes regarding the
use of these agents and the risk of suicidality in children and adolescents. In March
2005, we implemented these labeling changes. EFFEXOR has never been recommended
for use in children and continues to be an appropriate and important therapy in treating
adult patients with major depressive disorder, generalized anxiety disorder and social
anxiety disorder. An indication for panic disorder, filed in the U.S., Canada and Europe
in the second half of last year, is
| | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

23

---

# Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Conditionand Results of
OperationsThree Months and Six Months Ended June 30, 2005

| | now
approved in several of the European markets and remains in active regulatory review in
the balance of the submitted countries.
| | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | The
PREMARIN family of products remains the standard of therapy to help women address
serious menopausal symptoms. In March 2005, we launched a direct-to-consumer advertising
campaign for PREMARIN. We also initiated a public education program in July 2005
to reinforce the importance of talking to a doctor or other health care professional
about menopause. Sales of the PREMARINfamily of products declined from $488.6
million for the 2004 first half to $470.8 million for the 2005 first half. The
introduction of low-dose PREMARINand PREMPROhelped moderate the decrease.
The 2005 second quarter sales of $259.9 million increased 17% from the 2004 second
quarter which was negatively impacted by de-stocking of wholesalers inventory.
| | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | Both
Consumer Healthcare and Animal Health posted increases in net revenue for the 2005 first
half over the 2004 first half. Consumer Healthcare net revenue increased 3% for the 2005
first half primarily from increased sales of ROBITUSSIN, ADVIL and CALTRATE brands.
In June 2005, the Company entered into an agreement with NBTY, Inc. for the sale of
substantially all of the assets of the Companys Solgar Vitamin & Herb product
line for $115.0 million. The transaction was completed on August 1, 2005.
| | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | Animal
Health net revenue increased 7% for the 2005 first half, reflecting higher sales of
livestock and poultry products, as well as higher sales of companion animal products
despite the impact of the voluntary recall of PROHEART 6 in the U.S. market
in September 2004.
| | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | In
order for us to sustain the growth of our core group of products, we must continue to
meet the global demand of our customers. Two of our important core products, PREVNAR and
ENBREL, are biological products that are extremely complicated and difficult to
manufacture. We continue to seek to improve manufacturing processes and overcome
production issues. With respect to PREVNAR, during 2004, upgrades and improvements
were made to the Wyeth manufacturing facilities and additional vial filling capacity
became available through a third-party filler. In July 2005, the first doses of
pre-filled syringes were introduced in the European market. In addition, pending
regulatory approval, pre-filled syringes from Wyeth and a third-party filler are expected
to be launched in the U.S. in early 2006. Overall, we expect to meet our 2005 PREVNAR production goal of 25  28 million doses.
| | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | In
July 2005, we received European regulatory approval for the production of ENBREL at
our Grange Castle, Ireland site and anticipate approval at Amgen Inc.s (Amgen)
BioNext facility in Rhode Island later this year. This expected additional manufacturing
capacity should help ENBREL reach its full commercial potential, although, as is
typical for new biological manufacturing facilities, margins are expected to be affected
during at least the initial year of production. In late March 2005, ENBREL was
launched for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis in Japan, where it is co-promoted by
Wyeth and Takeda
| | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

24

---

# Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Conditionand Results of
OperationsThree Months and Six Months Ended June 30, 2005

| | Pharmaceutical
Company, Limited (Takeda). Early in April 2005, we increased our ownership from 60% to
70% in our joint venture with Takeda.
| | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | We
have entered into wholesaler service agreements with many of our full-line pharmaceutical
wholesalers in the U.S., whereby, in return for certain price concessions, the
wholesalers have agreed not to exceed certain targeted inventory levels. As a result, we,
along with our wholesaler partners, are able to manage product flow and inventory levels
in a way that more closely follows trends in prescriptions.
| | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | Our
principal strategy for future success is based on research and development (R&D)
innovations. We intend to leverage our breadth of knowledge and resources across three
scientific development platforms (traditional pharmaceuticals, biologicals and vaccines)
to produce first-in-class and best-in-class therapies for significant unmet medical needs
around the world.
| | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | TYGACIL,
an innovative broad-spectrum I.V. antibiotic for serious, hospital-based infections,
which received FDA approval in June 2005, was launched in the U.S. in July 2005. Launch
of this first-in-class product comes at a time when the need for new antibiotic options
to combat serious, resistant infections is increasing. Regulatory review is ongoing in
Europe and around the world.
| | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | In
May 2005, we filed a New Drug Application (NDA) with the FDA for an oral contraceptive (LEVONORGESTREL/ETHINYL
ESTRADIOL) having a unique dosing regimen. If approved, this product will be the
lowest daily dose, monophasic oral contraceptive available in the U.S. and will offer a
dosing regimen that provides effective contraception as well as the option for a longer
interval between menstrual cycles. We expect several additional NDA filings over the next
12 to 18 months.
| | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | We
continue to address the challenges of the Companys diet drug litigation. As
discussed in more detail in Note 5 to our consolidated condensed financial statements, on
March 15, 2005, the proposed Seventh Amendment to the National Diet Drug Settlement was
approved as fair, adequate and reasonable. This is an important milestone not
only for the Seventh Amendment itself but also for the National Diet Drug Settlement in
general. The Seventh Amendment would create a new claims processing structure, funding
arrangement and payment schedule for matrix Level I or II claims, the least serious but
most numerous matrix claims in the Settlement. The amendment would ensure that these
claims are processed on a streamlined basis, while preserving funds in the existing Trust
for more serious claims. Three appeals had been filed challenging the approval of the
Seventh Amendment; however, two have been withdrawn and the Company and counsel for the plaintiff
class have filed a joint motion to remand the claim of the remaining appellant to the
District Court.
| | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | In
January 2005, we announced that the Company was in discussions with plaintiffsattorneys
representing a number of individuals who have opted out of the National Diet Drug
Settlement on a proposed process for settling downstream opt out cases. The
| | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

25

---

# Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Conditionand Results of
OperationsThree Months and Six Months Ended June 30, 2005

| | proposed
process provides a methodology for valuing different categories of claims and also
provides a structure for individualized negotiations between the Company and lawyers
representing diet drug claimants. Counsel for greater than 90% of the plaintiffs with
pending Intermediate and Back-End Opt Out lawsuits have agreed to participate in the
process or are otherwise engaged in settlement discussions with the Company. Some of
these discussions have resulted in settlement agreements, while other such discussions
remain at a preliminary stage. As we move forward, additional attorneys may agree to
participate in the process and some who have previously agreed may decide to withdraw
their participation. We will continue to try those cases where attorneys are not willing
to participate in this settlement process. The Company cannot predict the number of cases
that might be settled as a result of this process.
| | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | Generally,
we face the same difficult challenges that all research-based pharmaceutical companies
are confronting. Pressure from government agencies and consumers to lower prices either
through leveraged purchasing plans, importation or reduced reimbursement for prescription
drugs poses significant challenges for our Company. Health care providers and the general
public want more information about our products, and they want it delivered efficiently
and effectively. Regulatory burdens are increasing the demands on our Company, and they
increase both the cost and time it takes to bring new drugs to market. We also are faced
with the moderating rate of growth of some of our major products. Throughout 2005, we
will continue to embark on a series of long-term initiatives to address these changing
conditions with the objective of making Wyeth more efficient, more effective and more
profitable so that we may continue to thrive in this increasingly challenging
pharmaceutical environment.
| | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

26

---

# Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Conditionand Results of
OperationsThree Months and Six Months Ended June 30, 2005

| | Net Revenue
| | -----------

| | Worldwide
net revenue increased 12% for the 2005 second quarter and 13% for the 2005 first half
compared with prior year levels and was due to increases in the Pharmaceuticals, Consumer
Healthcare and Animal Health segments. Excluding the favorable impact of foreign
exchange, worldwide net revenue increased 10% for the 2005 second quarter and 11% for the
2005 first half.
| | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | The
following table sets forth worldwide net revenue results by reportable segment together
with the percentage changes from the comparable periods in the prior year:
| | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

> Net RevenueThree MonthsEnded June 30,(Dollars in millions)
> Segment
>      2005
>      2004
>      % IncreasePharmaceuticals
>      
>      $3,869.0
>         
>      $3,393.0
>         
>      14%Consumer Healthcare
>      600.0
>         
>      591.4
>         
>      1%Animal Health
>      244.8
>         
>      238.8
>         
>      2%Total
>      $4,713.8
>         
>      $4,223.2
>         
>      12%

> Net RevenueSix MonthsEnded June 30,(Dollars in millions)
> Segment
>      2005
>      2004
>      % IncreasePharmaceuticals
>      
>      $7,586.5
>         
>      $6,600.6
>         
>      15%Consumer Healthcare
>      1,216.8
>         
>      1,179.7
>         
>      3%Animal Health
>      489.5
>         
>      457.7
>         
>      7%Total
>      $9,292.8
>         
>      $8,238.0
>         
>      13%

| | Pharmaceuticals
| | ---------------

| | Worldwide
Pharmaceuticals net revenue increased 14% for the 2005 second quarter and 15% for the
2005 first half due primarily to higher sales of PREVNAR, ENBREL (internationally),
EFFEXOR XR, ZOSYN/TAZOCIN, PROTONIXand RAPAMUNE offset, in
part, by lower sales of SYNVISC which was divested in the 2005 first quarter.
Higher sales of PREVNAR reflected a return to the full dose vaccination schedule,
the resolution of manufacturing issues that limited production in the first half of 2004
and a catch-up of deferred doses from 2004 that resulted from supply constraints.
Increases in net revenue were also due to higher sales of nutritionals, BENEFIX and
rhBMP-2, as well as higher alliance revenue primarily as a result of higher sales
of ENBREL in North America. The increases in net revenue were also attributed to
higher 2005 second quarter sales of the PREMARIN family of products as compared
with the 2004 second quarter, which was adversely impacted by de-stocking of wholesalers inventory.
Excluding the
| | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

27

---

# Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Conditionand Results of
OperationsThree Months and Six Months Ended June 30, 2005

| | favorable
impact of foreign exchange, worldwide Pharmaceuticals net revenue increased 12% for the
2005 second quarter and 13% for the 2005 first half.
| | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | The
following table sets forth the significant worldwide Pharmaceuticals net revenue by
product for the three and six months ended June 30, 2005 compared with the same periods
in the prior year:
| | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

> Three Months
> Ended June 30,
>      Six Months
> Ended June 30,(In millions)
>      2005
>      2004
>      2005
>      2004EFFEXOR
>      
>      $   888.7
>         
>      $   831.8
>         
>      $1,757.2
>         
>      $1,607.5PROTONIX
>      453.9
>         
>      389.2
>         
>      863.3
>         
>      799.7PREVNAR
>      323.3
>         
>      219.1
>         
>      714.4
>         
>      392.5Nutritionals
>      266.3
>         
>      228.3
>         
>      520.8
>         
>      444.1ENBREL
>      272.3
>         
>      156.0
>         
>      509.3
>         
>      291.0PREMARINfamily
>      259.9
>         
>      222.7
>         
>      470.8
>         
>      488.6ZOSYN/ TAZOCIN
>      230.6
>         
>      182.3
>         
>      459.9
>         
>      363.7Oral Contraceptives
>      135.8
>         
>      141.0
>         
>      275.8
>         
>      283.8ZOTON
>      98.0
>         
>      114.7
>         
>      222.1
>         
>      226.7BENEFIX
>      83.1
>         
>      76.5
>         
>      172.0
>         
>      151.0RAPAMUNE
>      71.2
>         
>      56.1
>         
>      143.3
>         
>      114.4REFACTO
>      69.0
>         
>      64.0
>         
>      132.5
>         
>      124.3rhBMP-2
>      58.0
>         
>      53.5
>         
>      109.6
>         
>      76.6Alliance revenue
>      281.0
>         
>      152.0
>         
>      477.0
>         
>      301.4Other
>      377.9
>         
>      505.8
>         
>      758.5
>         
>      935.3Total Pharmaceuticals
>      $3,869.0
>         
>      $3,393.0
>         
>      $7,586.5
>         
>      $6,600.6

28

---

# Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Conditionand Results of
OperationsThree Months and Six Months Ended June 30, 2005

| | Consumer Healthcare
| | -------------------

| | Worldwide
Consumer Healthcare net revenue increased 1% for the 2005 second quarter and 3% for the
2005 first half. The results were due to a number of factors, including growth in ROBITUSSIN,
ADVILand CALTRATE brands, offset, in part, by a decrease in CENTRUM.
Excluding the favorable impact of foreign exchange, worldwide Consumer Healthcare net
revenue decreased 1% for the 2005 second quarter and increased 1% for the 2005 first
half.
| | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | The
following table sets forth significant worldwide Consumer Healthcare net revenue by
product for the three and six months ended June 30, 2005 compared with the same periods
in the prior year:
| | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

> Three Months
> Ended June 30,
>      Six Months
> Ended June 30,(In millions)
>      2005
>      2004
>      2005
>      2004CENTRUM
>      
>      $149.2
>         
>      $155.4
>         
>      $   290.0
>         
>      $   294.5ADVIL
>      128.2
>         
>      123.0
>         
>      247.5
>         
>      237.4CALTRATE
>      50.4
>         
>      45.0
>         
>      95.4
>         
>      85.0ROBITUSSIN
>      34.1
>         
>      28.9
>         
>      94.6
>         
>      77.3ADVIL COLD & SINUS
>      18.7
>         
>      21.4
>         
>      55.0
>         
>      51.6SOLGAR
>      25.2
>         
>      25.5
>         
>      52.5
>         
>      55.2CHAPSTICK
>      19.0
>         
>      17.2
>         
>      45.6
>         
>      43.5DIMETAPP
>      13.8
>         
>      14.7
>         
>      34.0
>         
>      34.8ALAVERT
>      15.7
>         
>      15.9
>         
>      32.8
>         
>      33.5Other
>      145.7
>         
>      144.4
>         
>      269.4
>         
>      266.9Total Consumer Healthcare
>      $600.0
>         
>      $591.4
>         
>      $1,216.8
>         
>      $1,179.7

29

---

# Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Conditionand Results of
OperationsThree Months and Six Months Ended June 30, 2005

| | Animal Health
| | -------------

| | Worldwide
Animal Health net revenue increased 2% for the 2005 second quarter and 7% for the 2005
first half due primarily to higher sales of livestock and poultry products. Increases in
net revenue were offset, in part, by lower sales of companion animal products for the
2005 second quarter primarily due to lower sales of PROHEART 6as a result of the
voluntary recall in the U.S. market in September 2004. Excluding the favorable impact of
foreign exchange, worldwide Animal Health net revenue decreased 1% for the 2005 second
quarter and increased 4% for the 2005 first half.
| | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | The
following table sets forth worldwide Animal Health net revenue by product category for
the three and six months ended June 30, 2005 compared with the same periods in the prior
year:
| | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

> Three Months
> Ended June 30,
>      Six Months
> Ended June 30,(In millions)
>      2005
>      2004
>      2005
>      2004Livestock products
>      
>      $  97.1
>         
>      $  92.5
>         
>      $197.9
>         
>      $176.2Companion animal products
>      73.8
>         
>      78.2
>         
>      145.1
>         
>      141.6Equine products
>      46.0
>         
>      43.9
>         
>      91.7
>         
>      91.8Poultry products
>      27.9
>         
>      24.2
>         
>      54.8
>         
>      48.1Total Animal Health
>      $244.8
>         
>      $238.8
>         
>      $489.5
>         
>      $457.7

30

---

# Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Conditionand Results of
OperationsThree Months and Six Months Ended June 30, 2005

| | The
following table sets forth the percentage changes in worldwide net revenue by reportable
segment and geographic area compared with the prior year, including the effect volume,
price and foreign exchange had on these percentage changes:
| | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

> % Increase (Decrease)
>             Three Months Ended June 30, 2005
>      % Increase (Decrease)
>             Six Months Ended June 30, 2005Volume
>      Price
>      Foreign
> Exchange
>      Total
>     Net Revenue
>      Volume
>      Price
>      Foreign
> Exchange
>      Total
>     Net RevenuePharmaceuticalsUnited States
>      2%
>         
>      7%
>         
>      
>         
>      9%
>         
>      5%
>         
>      4%
>         
>      
>         
>      9%International
>      16%
>         
>      
>         
>      5%
>         
>      21%
>         
>      17%
>         
>      1%
>         
>      4%
>         
>      22%Total
>      8%
>         
>      4%
>         
>      2%
>         
>      14%
>         
>      10%
>         
>      3%
>         
>      2%
>         
>      15%Consumer HealthcareUnited States
>      (6)%
>         
>      2%
>         
>      
>         
>      (4)%
>         
>      (3)%
>         
>      1%
>         
>      
>         
>      (2)%International
>      2%
>         
>      2%
>         
>      6%
>         
>      10%
>         
>      2%
>         
>      3%
>         
>      6%
>         
>      11%Total
>      (3)%
>         
>      2%
>         
>      2%
>         
>      1%
>         
>      (1)%
>         
>      2%
>         
>      2%
>         
>      3%Animal HealthUnited States
>      (11)%
>         
>      5%
>         
>      
>         
>      (6)%
>         
>      (4)%
>         
>      5%
>         
>      
>         
>      1%International
>      3%
>         
>      2%
>         
>      7%
>         
>      12%
>         
>      6%
>         
>      1%
>         
>      6%
>         
>      13%Total
>      (4)%
>         
>      3%
>         
>      3%
>         
>      2%
>         
>      1%
>         
>      3%
>         
>      3%
>         
>      7%TotalUnited States
>      
>         
>      6%
>         
>      
>         
>      6%
>         
>      3%
>         
>      4%
>         
>      
>         
>      7%International
>      13%
>         
>      1%
>         
>      5%
>         
>      19%
>         
>      14%
>         
>      1%
>         
>      5%
>         
>      20%Total
>      6%
>         
>      4%
>         
>      2%
>         
>      12%
>         
>      8%
>         
>      3%
>         
>      2%
>         
>      13%

| | The
Company deducts certain items from gross revenue, which primarily consist of provisions
for product returns, cash discounts, chargebacks/rebates, customer allowances and
consumer sales incentives. The provision for chargebacks/rebates relates primarily to
U.S. sales of pharmaceutical products provided to wholesalers and managed care
organizations under contractual agreements or to certain governmental agencies that
administer benefit programs, such as Medicaid. While different programs and methods are
utilized to determine the chargeback or rebate provided to the customer, the Company
considers both to be a form of price reduction. Chargebacks/rebates are the only
deductions from gross revenue that are considered significant by the Company and
approximated $603.0 million and $1,215.7 million for the 2005 second quarter and first
half, respectively, compared with $621.5 million and $1,154.4 million for the 2004 second
quarter and first half, respectively. The increase in chargebacks/rebates for the 2005
first half was due primarily to higher rebate rates and increased volumes of PROTONIX in
the managed care segment during the 2005 first quarter.
| | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | Except
for chargebacks/rebates, provisions for each of the other components of sales deductions,
including product returns, are individually less than 2% of gross sales. The provisions
charged against gross sales for product returns were $43.4 million and $100.3 million for
the 2005 second quarter and first half, respectively, compared with $22.4 million and
$98.1 million for the prior year. The 2004 second quarter was impacted by a
| | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

31

---

# Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Conditionand Results of
OperationsThree Months and Six Months Ended June 30, 2005

| | $20.0
million reduction in the returns reserve associated with the PREMARIN family of
products.
| | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | Operating Expenses
| | ------------------

| | Cost
of goods sold, as a percentage of Net revenue, increased to 28.4% for the 2005
second quarter compared with 27.9% for the 2004 second quarter and increased to 28.9% for
the 2005 first half compared with 28.4% for the 2004 first half. The increase was due
primarily to higher inventory and manufacturing losses as well as certain costs related
to plant reorganization activity in the 2005 second quarter in the Pharmaceuticals and Consumer Healthcare
segments. The decrease in gross margin was also due to higher royalty costs as a result of
higher sales of ENBRELand PREVNAR offset, in part, by an increase in
alliance revenue. For the 2005 first half, the decrease in gross margin was offset, in
part, by favorable manufacturing variances and a favorable product mix as a result of
higher sales of higher margin PREVNAR and EFFEXOR XR.
| | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | Selling,
general and administrative expensesincreased 7% for both the 2005 second quarter and
first half, while Net revenue increased at a rate of 12% and 13% for the 2005
second quarter and first half as compared with 2004. This difference is primarily
attributable to the significant increase in net revenue of PREVNAR and ENBREL, which
generally require lower promotional spending than other Pharmaceuticals products. In
addition, net revenue of PROTONIXand EFFEXOR also
increased significantly as compared with 2004 while promotional spending for these
products decreased. The 2005 first half was also impacted by higher selling expenses
related to an increase in sales force in Japan to support the launch of ENBREL as
well as pre-launch spending for TYGACIL in the Pharmaceuticals segment.
| | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | Research
and development expenses increased 7% for the 2005 second quarter and decreased 4%
for the 2005 first half as compared with 2004. The 2005 second quarter increase was
primarily attributable to higher salary-related expenses, partially offset by lower
clinical grant spending in the Pharmaceutical segment. The decrease in the 2005 first
half was primarily due to the non-recurrence of the upfront payment and charge in the
2004 first quarter of $145.5 million made in connection with the agreement entered into
between the Company and Solvay Pharmaceuticals (Solvay) to co-develop and co-commercialize four neuroscience
compounds. The 2005 first half also reflects the impact of lower clinical grant spending
in the Pharmaceuticals segment and higher other research operating expenses (including
higher chemicals and materials expenses).
| | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

32

---

# Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Conditionand Results of
OperationsThree Months and Six Months Ended June 30, 2005

| | Interest Expense and Other Income
| | ---------------------------------

| | Interest
expense, net for the three and six months ended June 30, 2005 and 2004 consisted of
the following:
| | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

> Three Months
> Ended June 30,
>      Six Months
> Ended June 30,(In millions)
>      2005
>      2004
>      2005
>      2004Interest expense
>      
>      $ 91.4
>         
>      $ 75.4
>         
>      $ 181.5
>         
>      $ 146.2Interest income
>      (64.5
>         )
>      (21.4
>         )
>      (116.8
>         )
>      (44.8
>         )Less: amount capitalized forcapital projects
>      (9.7
>         )
>      (22.1
>         )
>      (17.5
>         )
>      (42.6
>         )Total interest expense, net
>      $ 17.2
>         
>      $ 31.9
>         
>      $   47.2
>         
>      $   58.8

| | Interest
expense, net decreased 46% for the 2005 second quarter and 20% for the 2005 first
half due primarily to higher interest income offset, in part, by higher interest expense
and lower capitalized interest. Weighted average debt outstanding during the 2005 second
quarter and first half was $7,799.1 million and $7,860.7 million, respectively, compared
with prior year levels of $8,146.7 million and $8,425.5 million, respectively. The impact
on interest expense of lower weighted average debt outstanding was offset by an increase
in interest rates and increased interest income earned on higher cash balances in 2005
versus 2004. The lower capitalized interest resulted from reduced spending for long-term
capital projects in process. These projects include the expansion of existing
manufacturing facilities in Ireland and Puerto Rico.
| | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | Other
income, net decreased $25.6 million for the 2005 second quarter primarily due to
lower net gains resulting from sales and impairments of fixed assets. The $32.1 million
increase for the 2005 first half resulted from an increase in royalty income and income
received in connection with a settlement regarding certain environmental issues. Other
income, net was further impacted by pre-tax gains from the divestiture of certain
Pharmaceuticals and Consumer Healthcare products of approximately $143.0 million and
$153.6 million in the 2005 and 2004 first six months, respectively. Gains from product
divestitures were not significant for the 2005 or 2004 second quarter. The 2005
divestitures included product rights to SYNVISC and EPOCLER(in Brazil).
The 2004 divestitures included product rights to indiplon, DIAMOX (in Japan), and
the Companys nutritionals products in France. The sales, profits and net assets of
these divested products, individually or in the aggregate, were not material to either
business segment or the Companys consolidated financial position or results of
operations.
| | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

33

---

# Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Conditionand Results of
OperationsThree Months and Six Months Ended June 30, 2005

| | Income Before Income Taxes
| | --------------------------

| | The
following table sets forth worldwide income before income taxes by reportable segment
together with the percentage changes from the comparable periods in the prior year:
| | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

> Income Before Income TaxesThree Months
> Ended June 30,
>      Six Months
> Ended June 30,(Dollars in millions)
> Segment
>      2005
>      2004
>      % Increase/
> (Decrease)
>      2005
>      2004
>      % Increase/
> (Decrease)Pharmaceuticals(1)
>      
>      $ 1,185.0
>         
>      $    965.9
>         
>      23%
>         
>      $ 2,423.6
>         
>      $ 1,838.0
>         
>      32%Consumer Healthcare
>      97.7
>         
>      104.6
>         
>      (7)%
>         
>      218.8
>         
>      214.1
>         
>      2%Animal Health
>      61.6
>         
>      50.3
>         
>      22%
>         
>      112.8
>         
>      88.0
>         
>      28%Corporate
>      (100.3
>         )
>      (57.7
>         )
>      74%
>         
>      (137.7
>         )
>      (133.1
>         )
>      3%Total(2)
>      $ 1,244.0
>         
>      $ 1,063.1
>         
>      17%
>         
>      $ 2,617.5
>         
>      $ 2,007.0
>         
>      30%

| | (1) | Pharmaceuticals
for the 2004 first half included a first quarter charge of           $145.5 within Research
and development expenses related to the upfront           payment to Solvay in
connection with the co-development and co-commercialization           of four
neuroscience compounds. Excluding the upfront payment from the 2004           first half
results, but including Pharmaceuticals product divestiture gains           discussed in
footnote 2 below, Pharmaceuticals income before income taxes           increased 22%.
| | --- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | (2) | Income
before income taxes included $4.5 and $143.0 for the 2005 second quarter           and
first half, respectively, and $12.9 and $153.6 for the 2004 second quarter           and
first half, respectively, related to gains from the divestiture of certain
          Pharmaceuticals and Consumer Healthcare products. The 2005 divestitures
included           product rights to SYNVISC and EPOCLER (in Brazil). The
2004           divestitures included product rights to indiplon, DIAMOX (in
Japan), and           the Companys nutritionals products in France.
| | --- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | Worldwide
Pharmaceuticals income before income taxes for the 2005 second quarter and first half
increased 23% and 32%, respectively. The increase was due primarily to higher net revenue
and lower selling and general expenses, as a percentage of net revenue, offset in part,
by decreased gross profit margins earned on worldwide sales of Pharmaceuticals products
and higher research and development expenses in the 2005 second quarter. The increase in
income before income taxes for the 2005 first half is also attributable to lower research
and development expenses primarily due to the non-recurrence of the upfront payment to
Solvay.
| | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | Worldwide
Consumer Healthcare income before income taxes decreased 7% for the 2005 second quarter
due primarily to decreased gross profit margins as a result of plant reorganization costs
and higher research and development expenses, offset, in part, by higher net revenue and
lower selling and general expenses, as a percentage of net revenue. Worldwide Consumer
Healthcare income before income taxes increased 2% for the 2005 first half due primarily to
higher net revenue lower selling and general
| | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

34

---

# Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Conditionand Results of
OperationsThree Months and Six Months Ended June 30, 2005

| | expenses,
as a percentage of net revenue, offset, in part, by higher research and development
expenses.
| | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | Worldwide
Animal Health income before income taxes for the 2005 second quarter and first half
increased 22% and 28%, respectively. The increase was due primarily to higher net revenue
and lower selling and general expenses, as a percentage of net revenue. The 2005 second
quarter was also impacted by increased gross profit margins earned on worldwide sales of
Animal Health products.
| | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | Corporate
expenses, net for the 2005 second quarter were $100.3 million compared with $57.7 million
for the 2004 second quarter. Corporate expenses, net for the 2005 first half were $137.7
million compared with $133.1 million for the 2004 first half. The 2005 first half was
impacted by higher other income, net related to the sale of a manufacturing facility and
income received in connection with a settlement regarding certain environmental issues,
lower interest expense, net and higher general and administrative expenses.
| | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | Income Taxes
| | ------------

| | The
effective tax rate was 21.5% for the 2005 second quarter and first half, compared with
22.2% and 21.4%, respectively for the prior year. Excluding certain items affecting
comparability (as discussed below under Consolidated Net Income and Diluted
Earnings Per Share Results), the 2004 first half effective tax rate was 22.3%.
| | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | Consolidated Net Income and Diluted Earnings Per Share Results
| | --------------------------------------------------------------

| | Net
income and diluted earnings per share for the 2005 second quarter were $976.6 million and
$0.72, respectively, compared with net income and diluted earnings per share of $827.3
million and $0.61, respectively, in the prior year, both increases of 18%. Net income and
diluted earnings per share for the 2005 first half were $2,054.7 million and $1.52,
respectively, compared with net income and diluted earnings per share of $1,577.0 million
and $1.17, respectively, in the prior year, both increases of 30%.
| | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | The
Companys management uses various measures to manage and evaluate the Companys
performance and believes it is appropriate to specifically identify certain significant
items included in net income and diluted earnings per share to assist investors with
analyzing ongoing business performance and trends. In particular, the Companys
management believes that comparisons between the 2005 and 2004 first half results of
operations are influenced by the impact of the 2004 first quarter upfront payment of
$145.5 million ($94.6 million after-tax or $0.07 per share-diluted) to Solvay that is
included in net income and diluted earnings per share. The significant upfront payment
related to the co-development and co-commercialization of the four neuroscience compounds
being developed with Solvay, which was immediately expensed and included in Research
and
| | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

35

---

# Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Conditionand Results of
OperationsThree Months and Six Months Ended June 30, 2005

| | developmentexpenses, has been identified by the Companys management when evaluating
the Companys performance. Isolating this item when reviewing the Companys
results provides a more appropriate view of operations for these accounting periods.
| | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | Excluding
the Solvay payment, the increases in net income and diluted earnings per share for the
2005 second quarter and first six months were due primarily to higher net revenue, lower
selling, general and administrative expenses, as a percentage of net revenue, and lower
interest expense, net, offset, in part, by higher cost of goods sold and higher research
and development spending. The 2005 first half was also impacted by higher other income,
net.
| | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | Gains
from product divestitures constitute an integral part of the Companys analysis of
divisional performance and are important to understanding changes in our reported net
income. Gains from product divestitures for the 2005 second quarter and first half were
$4.5 million ($2.7 million after-tax) and $143.0 million ($92.8 million after-tax or
$0.07 per share-diluted), respectively, compared with $12.9 million ($9.0 million
after-tax or $0.01 per share-diluted) and $153.6 million ($101.6 million after-tax or
$0.08 per share-diluted), respectively, for the 2004 second quarter and first half.
| | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | Liquidity, Financial Condition and Capital Resources
| | ----------------------------------------------------

| | Cash
flows provided by operating activities totaling $387.3 million during the 2005 first half
were generated primarily by net earnings of $2,054.7 million, offset, in part, by the
establishment of the Seventh Amendment security fund of $1,250.0 million and payments of
$591.1 million related to the diet drug litigation (see Note 5 to the consolidated
condensed financial statements.) The cash flow impact of the change in working capital,
which used $330.6 million of cash as of June 30, 2005, excluding the effects of foreign
exchange, was offset by non-cash depreciation and amortization expense included in net
earnings. The change in working capital primarily consisted of a decrease in accounts
payable and accrued expenses of $269.8 million relating to timing of payments and an
increase in accounts receivable of $91.3 million relating to increased sales. The change
in working capital, which used $588.1 million of cash as of June 30, 2004, excluding the
effects of foreign exchange, primarily consisted of a decrease of accounts payable and
accrued expenses of $301.2 million relating to timing of payments, an increase in
accounts receivable of $164.0 million relating to increased sales and a decrease in
accrued taxes of $92.4 million due to timing of payments.
| | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | During
the 2005 first half, the Company received investment proceeds through the sales and
maturities of marketable securities of $1,119.4 million and the sales of assets totaling
$177.7 million. The proceeds from the sales and maturities of marketable securities were
primarily used to fund the Seventh Amendment security fund. In addition, the Company used
$434.2 million of cash for investments in property, plant and equipment, $379.4 million
of cash for purchases of marketable securities and $92.7 million of cash for the purchase
of an additional equity interest in a joint venture. The capital expenditures
| | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

36

---

# Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Conditionand Results of
OperationsThree Months and Six Months Ended June 30, 2005

| | made
during the 2005 first half were consistent with the Companys commitment to expand
existing manufacturing and research and development facilities worldwide, and to build
new biotechnology facilities.
| | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | The
Companys financing activities in the 2005 first half included repayments of debt
totaling $328.2 million and dividend payments of $615.3 million.
| | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | At June 30, 2005, the Company had outstanding $7,956.1 million in total debt, which
consisted of notes payable and other debt. Maturities of the Companys obligations
as of June 30, 2005 are set forth below.
| | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

> (In millions)
>      Total
>      Less than
>         1 year
>      1-3 years
>      4-5 years
>      Over
>         5 yearsTotal debt
>      
>      $7,956.1
>         
>      $9.1
>         
>      $399.1
>         
>      $1,634.9
>         
>      $5,913.0

| | The following represents the Companys credit ratings as of June 30, 2005:
| | --------------------------------------------------------------------------

> Moody's
>      S&P
>      FitchShort-term debt   
> Long-term debt    
> Outlook           
> Last rating update
>      P-2 
>             Baa1 
>       Developing 
> February 8, 2005
>      A-1
>                 A
>          Negative
>  December 8, 2003
>      F-2
>               A-
>         Negative
> January 31, 2005

| | In
light of the circumstances discussed in Note 5 to the consolidated condensed financial
statements, including the unknown number of valid matrix claims and the unknown number
and merits of valid downstream opt outs, it is not possible to predict the ultimate
liability of the Company in connection with its diet drug legal proceedings. It is
therefore not possible to predict whether, and if so when, such proceedings will have a
material adverse effect on the Companys financial condition, results of operations
and/or cash flows and whether cash flows from operating activities and existing and
prospective financing resources will be adequate to fund the Companys operations,
pay all liabilities related to the diet drug litigation, pay dividends, maintain the
ongoing programs of capital expenditures, and repay both the principal and interest on
its outstanding obligations without the disposition of significant strategic core assets
and/or reductions in certain cash outflows.
| | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | Certain Factors that May Affect Future Results
| | ----------------------------------------------

| | Competition
| | -----------

| | The
Company operates in the highly competitive pharmaceutical and consumer health care
industries. PREMARIN, the Companys principal conjugated estrogens product
manufactured from pregnant mares urine, and related products PREMPROand
| | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

37

---

# Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Conditionand Results of
OperationsThree Months and Six Months Ended June 30, 2005

| | PREMPHASE (which are single tablet combinations of the conjugated estrogens in PREMARIN and
the progestin medroxyprogesterone acetate) are the leaders in their categories and
contribute significantly to net revenue and results of operations. PREMARINs
natural composition is not subject to patent protection (although PREMPRO has
patent protection). PREMARIN,PREMPRO and PREMPHASEare indicated
for the treatment of certain menopausal symptoms. They also are approved for the
prevention of osteoporosis, a condition involving a loss of bone mass in postmenopausal
women. Their use for that purpose in women without symptoms should be limited to cases
where non-hormonal treatments have been seriously considered and rejected.
Estrogen-containing products manufactured by other companies have been marketed for many
years for the treatment of menopausal symptoms. During the past several years, other
manufacturers have introduced products for the treatment and/or prevention of
osteoporosis. New products containing different estrogens and/or different progestins
from those found in PREMPROand PREMPHASE, utilizing various forms of
delivery and having many forms of the same indications, have been introduced. Some
companies also have attempted to obtain approval for generic versions of PREMARIN.
These products, if approved, would be routinely substitutable for PREMARINand
related products under many state laws and third-party insurance payer plans. In May
1997, the FDA announced that it would not approve certain synthetic estrogen products as
generic equivalents of PREMARIN given known compositional differences between the
active ingredient of these products and PREMARIN. Although the FDA has not
approved any generic equivalent to PREMARIN to date, PREMARIN will continue
to be subject to competition from existing and new competing estrogen and other products
for its approved indications and may be subject to generic competition from either
synthetic or natural conjugated estrogens products in the future. One other company had
announced that it had applied for FDA approval of a generic version of PREMARINderived
from the same natural source, but that company has since announced the withdrawal of its
application. The Company cannot predict the timing or outcome of any other efforts to
seek FDA approval for generic versions of PREMARIN.
| | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | Two
of the Companys largest products, EFFEXOR XR and PROTONIX, are the
subject of pending patent litigation involving potential generic competition. In the case
of EFFEXOR XR, the Company has patent protection in the United States until at
least June 2008, when the patent covering the active ingredient in EFFEXOR,
venlafaxine, will expire. The pending litigation involves the infringement by a potential
generic competitor of the Companys patents relating to extended-release venlafaxine
that expire in 2017. In the event that the Company is not successful in this action, EFFEXOR XR may
face generic competition as early as June 2008. In the case of PROTONIX, the
Company and its partner, Altana, have patent protection until at least July 2010, when
the patent covering the active ingredient in PROTONIX, pantoprazole, will expire.
That patent is being asserted against potential generic competitors. In the event the
Company is not successful in this action, PROTONIX may face generic
competition prior to July 2010. Although the Company believes that its patents are valid,
there can be no assurance as to the outcome of these matters, which could materially
affect future results of operations.
| | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

38

---

# Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Conditionand Results of
OperationsThree Months and Six Months Ended June 30, 2005

| | Growth
in overall usage of antidepressants globally appears to be slowing for a variety of
reasons. In addition, the FDA has recommended new class labeling for antidepressants that
will, among other things, more prominently highlight the already labeled risk of suicide
in children and adolescents in a boxed warning. The Company has already implemented the
labeling change for EFFEXOR. The FDA also has requested that data regarding
suicidality from clinical trials in adults be re-examined using the same approach
developed for evaluating the pediatric data. The Company will respond to the FDAs
request.
| | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | In
addition, the United Kingdom Committee on the Safety of Medicines (CSM) recently
completed a review of the safety and efficacy of the selective serotonin reuptake
inhibitor class of antidepressants as well as EFFEXOR. As a result of this review,
new class labeling for antidepressants as well as restrictions on the use of EFFEXORin the United Kingdom have been implemented. The Company initially appealed this
decision to the CSM, but has now decided to make a further appeal to the United
Kingdoms Medicines Commission.
| | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | The
Company expects further global regulatory scrutiny of the drugs in this therapeutic area,
including EFFEXOR. The Company cannot predict the level of impact these issues may
have on future global usage of EFFEXOR.
| | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | The
proton pump inhibitor category is highly competitive. PROTONIX is subject to
discounting demands by managed care and state organizations and price competition from
generic omeprazole and other branded proton pump inhibitor products. This pricing
pressure may have an effect on future net sales. PROTONIX business is shifting
from the more heavily discounted Medicaid segment to the less heavily discounted third
party managed care segment. This trend is expected to continue throughout 2005 and,
despite an anticipated flat to slight decline in the rate of overall prescription
volume growth, it is expected to have a positive impact on profitability.
| | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | Product Supply
| | --------------

| | Market
demand for ENBREL continued to grow in the second quarter 2005, as net sales
increased 45% within North America and 75% outside North America when compared to second
quarter 2004 results. As this strong growth in demand continues, worldwide manufacturing
for ENBRELalso continues to improve, and supply has remained unconstrained since
early 2004. Continued improvements in the existing Rhode Island and Boehringer Ingelheim
facilities performance, combined with the FDA approval of a second Boehringer
Ingelheim facility in June 2004, were key contributors to the manufacturing capacity
increases that have continued through the first half of 2005. While this performance
contributes to the supply of ENBRELin 2005, additional manufacturing supply will
be required due to continued expected market growth.
| | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

39

---

# Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Conditionand Results of
OperationsThree Months and Six Months Ended June 30, 2005

| | In
July 2005, Wyeth received approval from the European Medicines Agency for its Grange
Castle, Ireland, facility. Additionally, Amgen expects the approval of a second facility
in Rhode Island in 2005. These new manufacturing facilities will help to ensure
uninterrupted supply and support the continued growth of ENBREL.
| | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | Supply Chain
| | ------------

| | Management
continually reviews the Companys supply chain structure with respect to utilization
of production capacities as well as manufacturing efficiencies. Changes in product demand
periodically create capacity imbalances within the manufacturing network. When such
imbalances result in overcapacity, which management considers to be other than temporary,
the network is restructured to gain optimal efficiency and to reduce production costs. As
a result, additional restructuring charges may occur in future periods.
| | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | The
Company is in discussion with various regulatory authorities regarding manufacturing
documentation issues at certain of the Companys European manufacturing sites. The Company
is working with the authorities to resolve these issues but cannot predict the outcome of
those discussions and what impact these issues will have on supply of the Companys
products manufactured at these facilities. However, based on information currently
available, the Company believes the impact, if any, on its consolidated statements of
operations will not be material.
| | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | Litigation and Contingent Liabilities
| | -------------------------------------

| | The
Company is involved in various legal proceedings, including product liability and
environmental matters that arise from time to time in the ordinary course of business,
the most significant of which are described in the Companys Annual Report on Form
10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004, the Companys Quarterly Report on Form
10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2005, interim Current Reports filed on Form 8-K, and
this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q. These include allegations of injuries caused by
drugs, vaccines and over-the-counter products, including PONDIMIN(which in
combination with phentermine, a product that was not manufactured, distributed or sold by
the Company, was commonly referred to as fen-phen), REDUX, the prior
formulation of DIMETAPP, the prior formulation of ROBITUSSIN,PREMPRO and
PREMARIN and EFFEXOR, among others. In addition, the Company has
responsibility for environmental, safety and cleanup obligations under various local,
state and federal laws, including the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation
and Liability Act, commonly known as Superfund.
| | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | The
estimated costs that the Company expects to pay are accrued when the liability is
considered probable and the amount can be reasonably estimated (see Note 5 to the
consolidated condensed financial statements for a discussion of the costs associated with
theREDUXand PONDIMIN diet drug litigation). In many cases, future
environmental-related expenditures cannot be quantified with a reasonable degree of
accuracy. As
| | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

40

---

# Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Conditionand Results of
OperationsThree Months and Six Months Ended June 30, 2005

| | investigations
and cleanups proceed, environmental-related liabilities are reviewed and adjusted as
additional information becomes available. Prior to November 2003, the Company was
self-insured for product liability risks with excess coverage on a claims-made basis from
various insurance carriers in excess of the self-insured amounts and subject to certain
policy limits. Effective November 2003, the Company became completely self-insured for
product liability risks. In the opinion of the Company, although the outcome of any legal
proceedings cannot be predicted with certainty, the ultimate liability of the Company in
connection with its legal proceedings (other than the diet drug litigation, the potential
effects of which are discussed in Note 5 to the consolidated condensed financial
statements) will not have a material adverse effect on the Companys financial
position but could be material to the results of operations or cash flows in any one
accounting period.
| | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | Cautionary Statements Regarding Forward-Looking Information
| | -----------------------------------------------------------

| | The
Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 provides a safe harbor for
forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements may appear in periodic reports
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (including the Companys Annual
Reports on Form 10-K and Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q), in press releases, in the
Companys Annual Report to Stockholders and other reports to stockholders, and in
other communications made by the Company. These forward-looking statements can be
identified by their use of words such as anticipates, expects,is
confident, plans, could, will,believes, estimates, forecasts, projectsand
other words of similar meaning. These forward-looking statements address various matters
including:
| | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | o | Our
anticipated results of operations, liquidity position, financial condition and capital
resources;
| | - | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | o | The
benefits that we expect will result from our business activities and certain transactions
we announced or completed, such as increased revenues, decreased expenses, and avoided
expenses and expenditures;
| | - | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | o | Statements
of our expectations, beliefs, future plans and strategies, anticipated developments and
other matters that are not historical facts;
| | - | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | o | The
accuracy of our estimates and assumptions utilized in our critical accounting policies;
| | - | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | o | The
timing and successfulness of research and development activities;
| | - | ---------------------------------------------------------------------

| | o | Trade
buying patterns;
| | - | ----------------------

| | o | The
impact of competitive or generic products;
| | - | ----------------------------------------------

| | o | Economic
conditions, including interest rate and foreign currency exchange rate fluctuation;
| | - | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | o | Changes
in generally accepted accounting principles;
| | - | ----------------------------------------------------

| | o | Any
changes in political or economic conditions due to the threat of terrorist activity
worldwide and related U.S. military action internationally;
| | - | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | o | Costs
related to product liability, patent protection, government investigations and other
legal proceedings;
| | - | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

41

---

# Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Conditionand Results of
OperationsThree Months and Six Months Ended June 30, 2005

| | o | Our
ability to protect our intellectual property, including patents;
| | - | --------------------------------------------------------------------

| | o | The
impact of legislation or regulation affecting pricing, reimbursement or access, both in
the United States and internationally;
| | - | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | o | Impact
of managed care or health care cost-containment;
| | - | -------------------------------------------------------

| | o | Increased
focus on privacy issues in countries around the world, including the United States and
the European Union;
| | - | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | o | Governmental
laws and regulations affecting our U.S. and international businesses, including tax
obligations and results of tax audits;
| | - | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | o | Environmental
liabilities;
| | - | --------------------------

| | o | The
future impact of presently known trends, including those with respect to product
performance and competition;
| | - | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | o | Change
in product mix;
| | - | ----------------------

| | o | Anticipated
amounts of future contractual obligations and other commitments, including future minimum
rental payments under non-cancelable operating leases and estimated future pension and
other postretirement benefit payments;
| | - | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | o | Anticipated
developments relating to sales of PREMPRO/PREMARIN family of products, PROTONIX,
EFFEXOR, ENBREL, and PREVNAR and ENBREL product supply; and
| | - | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | o | Expectations
regarding the impact of potential litigation relating to PREMPRO, PREMARIN,
ROBITUSSIN, DIMETAPP and EFFEXOR; the nationwide class action
settlement relating to REDUX and PONDIMIN; and additional litigation
charges related to REDUX and PONDIMIN.
| | - | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | All
forward-looking statements address matters involving numerous assumptions, risks and
uncertainties, which may cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed
or implied by us in those statements. Accordingly, we caution you not to place undue
reliance on these forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date on which
they were made. From time to time, we also may provide oral or written forward-looking
statements in other materials we release to the public. Additionally, we undertake no
obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a
result of new information, future developments or otherwise. As permitted by the Private
Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, the Company is hereby filing the following
cautionary statements identifying important factors, which among others, could cause the
Companys actual results to differ materially from expected and historical results:
| | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | Economic
factors over which we have no control such as changes in business and economic
conditions, including, but not limited to, inflation and fluctuations in interest rates,
foreign currency exchange rates and market value of our equity investments and any
impacts of war or terrorist acts;
| | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | Interruptions
of computer and communication systems including computer viruses, that could impair the
Companys ability to conduct business and communicate internally with its customers;
| | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

42

---

# Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Conditionand Results of
OperationsThree Months and Six Months Ended June 30, 2005

| | Increasing
pricing pressures, both in and outside the United States, resulting from continued
consolidation among health care providers, rules and practices of managed care groups and
institutional and governmental purchasers, judicial decisions and governmental laws and
regulations relating to Medicare, Medicaid and health care reform, pharmaceutical
reimbursement and pricing in general;
| | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | Competitive
factors, such as (i) new products developed by our competitors that have lower prices or
superior performance features or that are otherwise competitive with our current
products; (ii) technological advances and patents attained by our competitors; (iii)
changes in promotional regulations or practices; (iv) development of alternative
therapies; (v) potential generic competition for PREMARIN and for other health
care products as such products mature and patents or marketing exclusivity expire on such
products; (vi) problems with licensors, suppliers and distributors; (vii) business
combinations among our competitors and major customers; and (viii) ability to attract and
retain management and other key employees;
| | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | Government
laws and regulations affecting U.S. and international operations, including (i) trade,
monetary and fiscal policies and taxes; (ii) price controls, or reimbursement or access
policies; (iii) drug importation legislation; (iv) changes in governments and legal
systems; and (v) regulatory approval processes affecting approvals of products and
licensing, including, without limitation, uncertainties of the FDA approval process that
may delay or prevent the approval of new products and result in lost market opportunity;
| | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | Difficulties
and delays inherent in pharmaceutical research, product development, manufacturing and
commercialization, such as, (i) failure of new product candidates to reach market due to
efficacy or safety concerns, inability to obtain necessary regulatory approvals and the
difficulty or excessive cost to manufacture; (ii) the inability to identify viable new
chemical compounds; (iii) difficulties in successfully completing clinical trials; (iv)
difficulties in manufacturing complex products, particularly biological products, on a
commercial scale; (v) difficulty in gaining and maintaining market acceptance of approved
products; (vi) seizure or recall of products; (vii) the failure to obtain, the imposition
of limitations on the use of, or loss of patent and other intellectual property rights;
(viii) failure to comply with current Good Manufacturing Practices and other applicable
regulations and quality assurance guidelines that could lead to temporary manufacturing
shutdowns, product shortages and delays in product manufacturing; and (ix) other
manufacturing or distribution problems, including unexpected adverse events or
developments at any of the manufacturing facilities involved in the production of one or
more of the Companys principal products;
| | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | Difficulties
or delays in product manufacturing or marketing, including but not limited to, the
inability to build up production capacity commensurate with demand, the inability of our
suppliers to provide raw material, or the failure to predict market demand for or to gain
market acceptance of approved products;
| | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

43

---

# Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Conditionand Results of
OperationsThree Months and Six Months Ended June 30, 2005

| | Unexpected
safety or efficacy concerns arising with respect to marketed products, whether or not
scientifically justified, leading to product recalls, withdrawals, regulatory action on
the part of the FDA (or foreign counterparts) or declining sales;
| | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | Growth
in costs and expenses, changes in product mix, and the impact of any acquisitions or
divestitures, restructuring and other unusual items that could result from evolving
business strategies, evaluation of asset realization and organizational restructuring;
| | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | Legal
difficulties, any of which can preclude or delay commercialization of products or
adversely affect profitability, such as (i) product liability litigation related to our
products including, without limitation, litigation associated with DIMETAPP, ROBITUSSIN,
PREMPRO, PREMARIN, EFFEXOR, and our former diet drug products, REDUX and
PONDIMIN; (ii) claims asserting violations of antitrust, securities, or other
laws; (iii) tax matters; (iv) intellectual property disputes or changes in intellectual
property legal protections and remedies; (v) environmental matters, including obligations
under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act, commonly
known as Superfund; and (vi) complying with the consent decree with the FDA;
| | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | Fluctuations
in buying patterns of major distributors, retail chains and other trade buyers which may
result from seasonality, pricing, wholesaler buying decisions or other factors; and
| | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | Changes
in accounting standards promulgated by the Financial Accounting Standards Board, the
Emerging Issues Task Force, the Securities and Exchange Commission, and the American
Institute of Certified Public Accountants, which may require adjustments to our financial
statements.
| | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | This
list should not be considered an exhaustive statement of all potential risks and
uncertainties.
| | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

44

---

# Item 3.        Quantitative and
Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk

| | The
market risk disclosures appearing on page 79 and 80 of the Companys 2004 Annual
Report as incorporated by reference in the Form 10-K have not materially changed from
December 31, 2004. At June 30, 2005, the fair values of the Companys financial
instruments were as follows:
| | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

> Carrying
> Value
>      Fair
> Value(In millions)
> Description
>      Notional/
> ContractAmount
>      Assets (Liabilities)Forward contracts (1)
>      
>      $1,488.8
>         
>      $        1.7
>         
>      $        1.7Option contracts(1)
>      630.1
>         
>      8.1
>         
>      8.1Interest rate swaps
>      5,300.0
>         
>      220.2
>         
>      220.2Outstanding debt (2)
>      7,735.9
>         
>      (7,956.1
>         )
>      (8,373.0
>         )

| | (1) | If
the U.S. dollar were to strengthen or weaken by 10%, in relation to all           hedged
foreign currencies, the net payable on the forward contracts would           collectively
decrease or increase by approximately $94.7.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | (2) | If
the interest rates were to increase or decrease by one percentage point, the
          fair value of the outstanding debt would decrease or increase by approximately
          $686.2.
| | --- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | The
estimated fair values approximate amounts at which these financial instruments could be
exchanged in a current transaction between willing parties. Therefore, fair values are
based on estimates using present value and other valuation techniques that are
significantly affected by the assumptions used concerning the amount and timing of
estimated future cash flows and discount rates that reflect varying degrees of risk. The
fair value of forward contracts, currency option contracts and interest rate swaps
reflects the present value of the contracts at June 30, 2005 and the fair value of
outstanding debt instruments reflects a current yield valuation based on observed market
prices as of June 30, 2005.
| | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

# Item 4.       
 Controls and Procedures

| | As
of June 30, 2005, the Company carried out an evaluation, under the supervision and with
the participation of the Companys management, including the Chief Executive Officer
and Chief Financial Officer, of the effectiveness of the design and operation of the
Companys disclosure controls and procedures (as such term is defined in Rules
13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the Exchange Act). Based upon that evaluation, the Chief
Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer concluded that the Companys
disclosure controls and procedures are effective. During the 2005 second quarter, there
were no significant changes in the Companys internal control over financial
reporting (as such term is defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) under the Exchange
Act) that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, the
Companys internal control over financial reporting.
| | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

45

---

# Part II  Other
Information

# Item 1.
        Legal Proceedings

| | The
Company and its subsidiaries are parties to numerous lawsuits and claims arising out of
the conduct of its business, including product liability and other tort claims, the most
significant of which have been described in the Companys Annual Report on Form 10-K
for the year ended December 31, 2004, the Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q
for the quarter ended March 31, 2005, and items filed in Current Reports on Form 8-K in
2005.
| | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | The
REDUX and PONDIMIN diet drug litigation is discussed in greater detail in
Note 5 to the consolidated condensed financial statements.
| | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | Through
June 30, 2005, payments into the REDUX and PONDIMIN national settlement
funds, individual settlement payments, legal fees and other costs totaling $14,524.8
million were paid and applied against the litigation accrual. At June 30, 2005, $6,575.2
million of the litigation accrual remained.
| | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | On
March 15, 2005, United States District Judge Harvey Bartle III, the federal judge of the
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania overseeing the
national class action settlement, approved the proposed Seventh Amendment as fair,
adequate and reasonable. Three appeals from Judge Bartles decision were filed
by April 14, 2005, the deadline for such appeals. Two of those appeals have now been
withdrawn by the appellants who brought them and the Company and counsel for the
plaintiff class have filed a joint motion to remand the claim of the remaining appellant
to District Court.  When and if all appeals are finally resolved, the proposed
Seventh Amendment would include the following key terms:
| | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | o | The
amendment would create a new Supplemental Fund, to be administered by a Fund
Administrator who will be appointed by the District Court and who will process most
pending Level I and Level II matrix claims;
| | - | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | o | After
District Court approval, the Company became obligated to make initial payments of up to
$50.0 million (of which $25.0 million has been paid) to facilitate the establishment of
the Supplemental Fund and to enable the Supplemental Fund to begin reviewing claims.
Following affirmance by the Third Circuit of the District Courts approval and the
exhaustion of any further appellate review, the Company would make an additional payment
of $400.0 million to enable the Supplemental Fund to begin paying claims. The timing of
further payments would be dictated by the rate of review and payment of claims by the
Fund Administrator. The Company would ultimately deposit a total of $1,275.0 million, net
of certain credits, into the Supplemental Fund;
| | - | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | o | All
participating matrix Level I and Level II claimants who qualify under the Seventh
Amendment, who pass the Settlement Funds medical review and who otherwise satisfy
the requirements of the settlement (Category One class members) would receive a pro rata
share of the $1,275.0 million Supplemental Fund, after deduction of certain expenses and
other amounts from the Supplemental Fund. The pro rata amount would vary depending upon
the number
| | - | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

46

---

| |  | of claimants
who pass medical review, the nature of their claims, their age and other factors. A
participating Category One class member who does not qualify for a payment after such
medical review would be paid $2,000 from the Supplemental Fund;
| |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | o | Participating
class members who might in the future have been eligible to file Level I and Level II
matrix claims (Category Two class members) would be eligible to receive a $2,000 payment
from the Trust; such payments would be funded by the Company apart from its other funding
obligations under the nationwide settlement;
| | - | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | o | If
the participants in the Seventh Amendment have heart valve surgery or other more serious
medical conditions on Levels III through V of the nationwide settlement matrix by the
earlier of 15 years from the date of their last diet drug ingestion or by December 31,
2011, they would remain eligible to submit claims to the existing Trust and be paid the
current matrix amounts if they qualify for such payments under terms modified by the
Seventh Amendment. In the event the existing Trust is unable to pay those claims, the
Company would guarantee payment; and
| | - | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | o | All
class members who participate in the Seventh Amendment would give up any further opt out
rights as well as the right to challenge the terms of and the binding effect of the
nationwide settlement. Final approval of the Seventh Amendment also would preclude any
lawsuits by the Trust or the Company to recover any amounts previously paid to class
members by the Trust, as well as terminate the Claims Integrity Program (see Note 5 to
the consolidated condensed financial statements) as to all claimants who do not opt out
of the Seventh Amendment.
| | - | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | On
March 29, 2005, as collateral for the Companys financial obligations under the
Seventh Amendment, the Company established a security fund in the amount of $1,250.0
million. As of June 30, 2005, $1,050.0 million was included in Othercurrent
assets including deferred taxes and $200.0 million was included in Other assets
including deferred taxes. The amounts in the security fund are owned by the Company
and will earn interest income for the Company while residing in the security fund.
| | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | There
can be no assurance that the proposed Seventh Amendment will be upheld on appeal. If it
is upheld on appeal, only the claims of those class members who opted out of the Seventh
Amendment will be processed under the terms of the existing settlement agreement and
under the procedures that have been adopted by the Settlement Trust and the District
Court. Less than 5% of the class members who would be affected by the proposed Seventh
Amendment (approximately 1,900 of the Category One class members and approximately 5,100
of the Category Two class members) elected to opt out of the Seventh Amendment and to
remain bound by the current settlement terms. Should the proposed Seventh Amendment not
be upheld on appeal, all of the pending and future matrix claims would be processed under
the terms of the existing settlement agreement.
| | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | As
of June 30, 2005, approximately 62,000 individuals who had filed Intermediate or Back-End
opt out forms had pending lawsuits against the Company. The claims of approximately 46%
of the plaintiffs in the Intermediate and Back-End opt out cases served on the Company
are pending in Federal Court, with approximately 39% pending in State Courts. The claims
of approximately 15% of the Intermediate and Back-End opt
| | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

47

---

| | out
plaintiffs have been removed from State Courts to Federal Court but are still subject to
a possible remand to State Court. In addition, a large number of plaintiffs have asked
the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit to review and reverse orders entered by
the Federal Court overseeing the settlement which had denied the plaintiffs motions
to remand their cases to State Court. As of June 30, 2005, approximately 3,100
Intermediate or Back-End opt out plaintiffs have had their lawsuits dismissed for
procedural or medical deficiencies or for various other reasons.
| | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | The
claims of 18 class members who had taken advantage of the Intermediate and Back-End opt
out rights created in the nationwide settlement went to verdict from January 1 through
June 30, 2005. In three separate trials bifurcated to consider medical causation and
damages in the first phase and liability in the second phase, verdicts were returned in
favor of a total of seven plaintiffs, in the aggregate amount of approximately $840,000,
at the close of the initial stage of each trial. Those cases have since been settled.
Seven of the verdicts were defense verdicts in favor of the Company at the close of the
initial phase in similarly bifurcated trials. Two verdicts involved cases in which the
jury initially found in favor of the plaintiffs for $5.0 million and $500,000
respectively, but subsequently found for the Company during the liability phase, thereby
negating the earlier damage finding. Verdicts of $100.0 million each were returned in
favor of the remaining two plaintiffs at the close of the first phase of a similarly
bifurcated trial. The Company moved for a mistrial following the return of the $100.0
million verdicts and the second phase was postponed until July 25, 2005. The mistrial
motion has been fully briefed but not yet decided. The second phase of that trial was
subsequently postponed again to October 2005. Also during this period, the Philadelphia
Court of Common Pleas set aside an earlier verdict against the Company and in favor of
three plaintiffs in the aggregate amount of $1.355 million. The court ordered a new trial
of the second, or liability, phase of that case after determining that the testimony of
plaintiffs only liability expert witness was inadequate and in violation of the
Pennsylvania Rules of Evidence. A number of additional cases were settled, dismissed or
adjourned during the first half of 2005. Additional Intermediate and Back-End opt out
trials are scheduled throughout 2005 and 2006.
| | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | On
January 18, 2005, the Company and counsel representing certain downstream opt out
plaintiffs filed a motion with the District Court advising the Court that those parties
had developed a proposed process by which large numbers of the downstream opt out cases
might be negotiated and settled. The proposed process provides a methodology for valuing
different categories of claims and also provides a structure for individualized
negotiations between Wyeth and lawyers representing diet drug claimants. Counsel for
greater than 90% of the plaintiffs with pending Intermediate and Back-End Opt Out
lawsuits have agreed to participate in the process or are otherwise engaged in settlement
discussions with the Company. Some of these discussions have resulted in settlement agreements,
while other such discussions remain at a preliminary stage. The Company cannot predict the
number of cases that might be settled as a result of this process.
| | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | On
April 27, 2004, a jury in Beaumont, Texas hearing the case of Coffey, et al. v. Wyeth,
et al., No. E-167,334, 172nd Judicial District Court, Jefferson Cty., TX, returned a
verdict in favor of the plaintiffs for $113.4 million in compensatory damages and $900.0
million in punitive damages for the wrongful death of the plaintiffs decedent,
allegedly
| | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

48

---

| | as
a result of PPH caused by her use of PONDIMIN. On May 17, 2004, the Trial Court
entered judgment on behalf of the plaintiffs for the full amount of the jurys
verdict, as well as $4.2 million in pre-judgment interest and $188,737 in guardian ad
litem fees. On July 26, 2004, the Trial Court denied in their entirety the Companys
motions for a new trial or for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, including the Companys
request for application of Texass statutory cap on punitive damage awards. The
Company has filed an appeal from the judgment entered by the Trial Court and believes
that it has strong arguments for reversal or reduction of the awards on appeal due to the
significant number of legal errors made during trial and in the charge to the jury and
due to a lack of evidence to support aspects of the verdict. In connection with its
appeal, the Company was required by Texas law to post a bond in the amount of $25.0
million. The Company filed its brief in support of the appeal on April 14, 2005. Oral
argument is not expected until late 2005 or early 2006.
| | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | As
of June 30, 2005, the Company was a defendant in approximately 357 pending lawsuits in
which the plaintiff alleges a claim of PPH, alone or with other alleged injuries. Almost
all of these claimants must meet the definition of PPH set forth in the national
settlement agreement in order to pursue their claims outside of the national settlement
(payment of such claims, by settlement or judgment, would be made by the Company and not
by the Trust). Approximately 83 of these cases appear to be eligible to pursue a PPH
lawsuit under the terms of the national settlement. In approximately 160 of these cases,
the Company has filed or expects to file motions under the terms of the national
settlement to preclude plaintiffs from proceeding with their PPH claims. For the balance
of these cases, the Company currently has insufficient medical information to assess
whether or not the plaintiffs meet the definition of PPH under the national settlement.
The Company is aware of approximately 11 additional claims which are not currently the
subject of a PPH lawsuit but which appear to meet the settlements PPH definition.
During the course of settlement discussions, certain plaintiffs attorneys have
informed the Company that they represent additional individuals who claim to have PPH,
but the Company is unable to evaluate whether any such purported cases of PPH would meet
the national settlement agreements definition of PPH. The Company continues to work
toward resolving the claims of individuals who allege that they have developed PPH as a
result of their use of the diet drugs and intends to vigorously defend those PPH cases
that cannot be resolved prior to trial.
| | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | In
the product liability litigation involving PREMARIN and PREMPRO, the Companys
estrogen and estrogen/progestin therapies, respectively, a class certification hearing
was held June 1-3, 2005 before United States District Judge William Wilson of the United
States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas, who has been assigned to
conduct all coordinated pretrial proceedings in the federal litigation. The MDL
plaintiffs seek to represent PREMPRO users in a class action to recover damages
for purchase price refunds and medical monitoring costs. The Master Class Action
Complaint seeks to certify a consumer fraud subclass of PREMPRO users in 29
states; an unfair competition subclass of users in 29 states and a medical monitoring
subclass purportedly covering PREMPRO users in 27 states. The states allegedly
involved are not consistent between each subclass. Following the hearing, Judge Wilson
indicated that he intends to deny class certification of all the proposed classes and
will issue a formal opinion shortly. In addition to the pending class actions, the
Company is defending
| | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

49

---

| | approximately
3,600 actions in various courts for personal injuries including claims for breast cancer,
stroke, ovarian cancer and heart disease. Together, these cases assert claims on behalf
of approximately 5,640 women alleged injured by PREMPRO or PREMARIN.
| | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | In
the product liability litigation involving the Companys cough/cold products that
contained the ingredient phenylpropanolamine (PPA), the Company is currently a named
defendant in approximately 355 lawsuits on behalf of a total of approximately 570
plaintiffs.
| | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | In
the product liability litigation alleging that the administration of one or more vaccines
containing thimerosal, a preservative used in certain vaccines manufactured and
distributed by the Company as well as by other vaccine manufacturers, causes severe
neurological damage, including autism, the Company is currently defending approximately
380 lawsuits in various state and federal courts involving approximately 2,400
plaintiffs, approximately 990 of whom are vaccine recipients.
| | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | In
the product liability litigation involving the veterinary product PROHEART 6,
which the Companys Fort Dodge Animal Health subsidiary voluntarily recalled from
the market in September 2004, Deter v. Fort Dodge Animal Health, a putative class action
pending in South Carolina state court, has been voluntarily dismissed with prejudice by
the plaintiffs. An additional PROHEART 6 putative statewide class action has been
filed. Plaintiffs in Higginbotham v. Fort Dodge AnimalHealth, et al., No.
GIC 842886, Super. Ct., San Diego Cty., seek compensatory damages on the grounds that
Fort Dodge violated Californias Consumer Legal Remedies Act in the manufacture,
marketing, advertising, sale and distribution of PROHEART 6. Finally, the Company
has received a demand letter pursuant to the Massachusetts Consumer Protection Statute
demanding relief for economic injury on behalf of plaintiff and all other Massachusetts
residents who purchased and had their pets injected with PROHEART 6 as a heartworm
preventive. It is claimed that Wyeth falsely advertised PROHEART 6.
| | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | The
Company has been served with two putative economic loss class actions relating to
pediatric use of cough syrups containing the active ingredient dextromethorphan. The
plaintiff in Thompson v. Wyeth, Inc., et al., No. 5 0247, Super. Ct., Essex Cty.,
MA, seeks to represent a class of Massachusetts consumers who bought cough syrups
containing the active ingredient dextromethorphan for pediatric use during the period
from February 11, 2002 through the present. Plaintiff claims that dextromethorphan is
ineffective in providing nighttime relief for children with cough and sleep difficulty as
a result of upper-respiratory infection. On a single count of common law fraud, plaintiff
seeks compensatory damages and attorneys fees for the purported class. Plaintiff in
Yescavage v. Wyeth, Inc., et al., No. 05-CA-000736, Circ. Court, Lee Cty., FL,
seeks to represent a class of all similarly situated Florida residents who bought cough
syrups containing the active ingredient dextromethorphan for pediatric use during the
period from February 2001 through the present. Plaintiff seeks compensatory damages and
attorneys fees for the purported class.
| | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | In
the litigation in which plaintiffs allege that the defendant pharmaceutical companies
artificially inflated the Average Wholesale Price (AWP) of their drugs, a total of 43 New
| | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

50

---

| | York
counties have filed actions naming the Company as a defendant. All of these actions have
been removed to federal court and have been transferred or are pending transfer to the
U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts under the caption: In re:
Pharmaceutical Industry AWP Litigation, MDL 1456(MDL 1456).The majority of
the New York counties are plaintiffs in a Consolidated Complaint that was filed in June
2005 that asserts statutory and common law claims for damages suffered as a result of
alleged overcharging for prescription medication paid for by Medicaid. The Company
intends to move to dismiss some or all of the claims in the Consolidated Complaint. By
prior Order of the Court, additional proceedings involving the Company are not to occur
pending the determination of the Companys motion to dismiss. The Consolidated
Complaint does not include the separate actions filed against the Company by the County
of Erie and the County of Nassau, although the claims in these two actions are
substantially similar to those in the Consolidated Complaint. The action filed by the
County of Nassau is pending in MDL 1456. The action filed by the County of Erie, which
was originally filed in New York state court, was removed to the Western District of New
York and is pending transfer to the MDL proceeding. By stipulation, no response to the
Complaint is due until motions related to the removal and transfer of the action to MDL
1456 are decided. Other than described above, the Consolidated Complaint supplants the
complaints previously filed against the company by various New York counties. Finally,
the California Attorney General has agreed to dismiss the Company from State of
California v. Abbott Laboratories, et al., No. BC 287198 A, Super. Ct., Los
Angeles Cty., Cal., without any payment. The suit had alleged that the Company falsely
reported prices for ATIVAN injectable for the years 1997-2003.
| | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | In
September 2002, Israel Bio-Engineering Project (IBEP) filed an action against Amgen,
Immunex, the Company and one of the Companys subsidiaries (Docket No. C02-6880 ER,
D.Ca.) alleging infringement of U.S. Patent 5,981,701, by the manufacture, offer for
sale, distribution and sale of ENBREL. IBEP is not the assignee of record of this
patent, but is alleging ownership. IBEP seeks an accounting of damages and of any
royalties or license fees paid to a third party and seeks to have the damages trebled on
account of alleged willful infringement. IBEP also seeks to require the defendants to
take a compulsory non-exclusive license. Under its agreement with Amgen for the promotion
of ENBREL, the Company has an obligation to pay a portion of the patent litigation
expenses related to ENBREL in the U.S. and Canada as well as a portion of any
damages or other monetary relief awarded in such patent litigation. Yeda Research and
Development Co., Ltd., the assignee of record of the patent, intervened in the case and
filed a summary judgment motion seeking a ruling that it is the owner of the patent. On
March 15, 2005, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed in part and
reversed in part the lower courts summary judgment ruling in favor of the
defendants that IBEP does not own the 701 Patent, and remanded the action to the
lower court for further proceedings. The trial court has now set a trial date for
January-February 2006.
| | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | The
Company has received notifications from Teva Pharmaceuticals USA (Teva), Sandoz, Inc., Sun
Pharmaceutical Advanced Research Centre Limited (Sun) and Dr. Reddys that
Abbreviated New Drug Applications (ANDA) had been filed with the FDA seeking approval to
market generic pantoprazole sodium 20 mg and 40 mg delayed release tablets. Pantoprazole
sodium is the active ingredient used in PROTONIX. The
| | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

51

---

| | Orange
Book lists two patents in connection with PROTONIX tablets. The first of these
patents covers pantoprazole and expires in July 2010. The other listed patent is a
formulation patent and expires in December 2016. Wyeths licensing partner, Altana
Pharma AG (Altana) is the owner of these patents. In May 2004, Altana and the Company
filed a lawsuit against Teva and Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. in the U.S. District
Court for the District of New Jersey, Docket No. 2:04-CV-02355, alleging infringement of
the patent expiring in 2010. On March 4, 2005, the Company received a second notification
from Sun, indicating that Sun has now certified that it believes that the patent expiring
in 2010 is invalid, not infringed, or unenforceable. On April 13, 2005, Altana and the
Company filed a lawsuit against Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. and Sun Pharmaceutical
Advanced Research Centre Ltd. in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey,
Docket No. 2:05-CV-05-01966-JLL-RJH, alleging infringement of the patent expiring in
2010. The Company intends, and is informed that Altana intends, to vigorously pursue the
causes of action under these litigations. In June 2005 Sun sent a third notification that
Sun had filed an ANDA with the FDA seeking approval to market generic pantoprazole sodium
I.V. The Company and Altana are analyzing Suns arguments.
| | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | On
March 24, 2003, the Company filed suit in the United States District Court for the
District of New Jersey against Teva Pharmaceuticals, USA (Wyeth v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., Docket No. 03-CV-1293 (KSH), U.S.D.C., D. N.J.) alleging
that the filing of an ANDA by Teva seeking FDA approval to market 37.5 mg, 75 mg, and 150
mg venlafaxine HCl extended-release capsules infringes certain of the Companys
patents. Venlafaxine HCl is the active ingredient used in EFFEXOR XR. The
patents involved in the litigation relate to extended-release formulations of venlafaxine
and/or methods of their use. These patents expire in 2017. Teva has asserted that these
patents are invalid and/or not infringed. Under the 30-month stay provision of the
Hatch-Waxman Act, any FDA approval of Tevas ANDA cannot be made effective before
August 2005 unless the court earlier decides that the patents are invalid or not
infringed. Teva has not, to date, made any allegations as to the Companys patent
covering the compound, venlafaxine. Accordingly, Tevas ANDA may further not be
approved until the expiration of that patent, and its associated pediatric exclusivity
period, on June 13, 2008. The District Court has set an October 2005 trial date.
| | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | On
March 14, 2003, Aventis Pharma Deutschland (Aventis) and King Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
(King) filed a patent infringement suit against Cobalt Pharmaceuticals (Cobalt) in the
United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts (AventisPharma
Deutschland GmbH and King Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Cobalt Pharmaceuticals Inc.,
Docket No. 03-10492JLT, U.S.D.C., D. Mass.) alleging that Cobalt infringes an Aventis
patent for ramipril, which expires in October 2008, by filing an ANDA with the FDA
seeking approval to market generic 1.25 mg, 2.5 mg, 5 mg, and 10 mg ramipril capsules.
The Company co-promotes ALTACE (ramipril) together with King Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
Cobalt has alleged that this patent is invalid. Under the 30-month stay provision of the
Hatch-Waxman Act, any FDA approval of Cobalts ANDA cannot be made effective before
August 2005, unless the court earlier finds the patent invalid or not infringed. The
District Court has set a September 2005 trial date. In June 2005, Lupin, Ltd. (Lupin)
notified King and Aventis that it had filed an ANDA seeking to market generic ramipril
prior to expiration of U.S. 5,061,722, which expires in October 2008. The
| | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

52

---

| | Company
has been advised that King and Aventis have filed a patent infringement suit against
Lupin in the United States District Court of the District of Maryland.
| | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | Boston
Scientific brought a patent infringement lawsuit against Cordis, seeking to enforce a
patent on stent coatings against Cordis CYPHER sirolimus drug-eluting stent,
Boston Scientific Scimed v. Cordis, Docket No. 03-283, U.S.D.C., D. Del. In an
earlier filed action, Cordis sued Boston Scientific seeking to enforce Cordis stent
architecture patent. In the respective actions, both Boston Scientific and Cordis sought
a preliminary injunction against the other. On November 21, 2003, the District Court
denied both motions for preliminary injunction. Cordis appealed the denial of the
injunction against Boston Scientific to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal
Circuit. In May 2004, the appellate court affirmed the District Courts denial of
the preliminary injunction. After jury trial Boston Scientific was found to infringe
Cordis stent architecture patents and Cordis was found to infringe Boston Scientifics
coatings patent. Both Boston Scientific and Cordis have announced plans to appeal.
Although the Company is not a party to this litigation, if Cordis were to be enjoined
from selling the CYPHER stent, the Company could lose licensing income. Cordis has
advised the Company that it intends to vigorously defend this litigation.
| | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | In
the litigation alleging that the Company violated the antitrust laws through the use of
exclusive contracts and disguised exclusive contracts with managed care
organizations and pharmacy benefit managers concerning PREMARIN,the federal
district court granted the Companys motion for summary judgment in the J.B.D.L.
Corp. v. Wyeth-AyerstPharmaceuticals, Inc., Civ. A. No. C-1-01-704, U.S.D.C.,
S.D. Oh., and CVS Meridian, Inc. et al. v. Wyeth, Civil A. No. C-1-03-781,
U.S.D.C., S.D. Oh., actions. Plaintiffs in both actions have filed notices of appeal to
the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. Various actions brought by
indirect purchasers in both federal district court in Ohio and in state courts in both
California and Vermont remain pending. In the Vermont action, Deyo v. Wyeth, No.
735-12-04 (Vt. Sup. Ct.), the Company has answered the Complaint and moved for a stay
pending resolution of the previously-filed class action currently proceeding in federal
court in Ohio, Ferrell v. Wyeth-Ayerst Laboratories, Inc.,Civ. A. No. C-1-01-447,
U.S.D.C., S.D. Oh.
| | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | In
the litigation alleging that the Company, along with other pharmaceutical manufacturers,
violated federal antitrust statutes and certain state laws by unlawfully agreeing to
engage in conduct to prevent U.S. consumers from purchasing defendants prescription
drugs from Canada, a motion by the Company and its co-defendants to dismiss the complaint
has been granted in part and denied in part by the Magistrate Judge hearing the matter.
An appeal to the District Court from this ruling is pending. In re Canadian Import
Antitrust Litigation, Civ. No. 04-2724, U.S.D.C., D. Minn. Additionally, in the Clayworth
v. Pfizer, et al.,No. RG04172428, Super. Ct., Alameda Cty., action, the trial court
overruled defendants demurrer to the Third Amended Complaint and held that
plaintiffs conspiracy claims are adequately alleged. The trial court sustained the
demurrer with respect to unilateral price discrimination claims. Defendants answered the
Third Amended Complaint on July 15, 2005. Discovery is proceeding.
| | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

53

---

| | In
the litigation alleging that certain animal feed products in Europe were contaminated by
hormones allegedly originating at the Companys AHP Manufacturing B.V. (d/b/a Wyeth
Medica Ireland) affiliate, a Dutch animal feed supplier, Porker Foods B.V., and three
Dutch pig farmers, who allege damage arising out of MPA contamination, filed suit in June
2005 in the Dutch courts. They seek a total of 5.9 million Euros in damages allegedly
arising from the destruction of MPA-contaminated food and pigs. These claims are similar
to those made by other Dutch pig farmers. The Company has received an additional claim
letter, on behalf of another Dutch pig farmer, seeking unspecified damages.
| | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | The
Company intends to continue to defend all of the foregoing litigation vigorously.
| | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | In
the opinion of the Company, although the outcome of any legal proceedings cannot be
predicted with certainty, the ultimate liability of the Company in connection with
pending litigation (other than the litigation involving REDUXand PONDIMIN,
the potential effects of which are discussed in Note 5 to the consolidated condensed
financial statements) will not have a material adverse effect on the Companys
financial position but could be material to the results of operations or cash flows in
any one accounting period.
| | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

54

---

# Item 4.
       Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders

| | (a) | The
matters described under item 4(c) below were submitted to a vote of security
holders, through the solicitation of proxies pursuant to Section 14 under
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, at the Annual Meeting of
Stockholders held on April 21, 2005 (the Annual Meeting).
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | (b) | Not
applicable.
| | --- | ---------------

| | (c) | The
following describes the matters voted upon at the Annual Meeting and sets
forth the number of votes cast for, against or withheld and the number of
abstentions as to each such matter (except as provided below, there were
no broker non-votes):
| | --- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | (i) | Election of directors:
| | --- | ----------------------

| |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 |                                                                                                                                                          |                                                                                                                       
| | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| | Nominee
Richard L. Carrion 
Robert Essner 
John D. Feerick 
Frances D. Fergusson, Ph.D. 
Robert Langer, Sc.D. 
John P. Mascotte 
Mary Lake Polan, M.D., Ph.D., M.P.H.
Ivan G. Seidenberg 
Walter V. Shipley 
John R. Torell III | For
1,033,597,399 
1,032,704,760 
1,034,990,037 
1,040,596,541 
1,040,912,217 
1,007,174,836 
1,041,077,640 
1,033,849,084 
1,034,798,535 
1,034,880,378 | Withheld
23,531,892
24,424,531
22,139,254
16,532,750
16,217,074
49,954,455
16,051,651
23,280,207
22,330,756
22,248,913
| |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 |                                                                                                                                                          |                                                                                                                       

| | (ii) | Ratification
of the appointment of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP as independent registered public accounting firm for 2005:
| | ---- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| |                   |                   |                  
| | ----------------- | ----------------- | -----------------
| | For
1,049,758,025 | Against
6,109,123 | Abstain
1,262,143
| |                   |                   |                  

| | (iii) | Adoption of the 2005 Stock Incentive Plan:
| | ----- | ------------------------------------------

| |                 |                     |                  
| | --------------- | ------------------- | -----------------
| | For
810,417,189 | Against
171,305,715 | Abstain
5,785,685
| |                 |                     |                  

| |  | There were
69,620,702 broker non-votes with reference to this item.
| |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------

| | (iv) | Adoption
of Stockholder Proposal regarding reimportation of prescription drugs:
| | ---- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| |                 |                     |                    
| | --------------- | ------------------- | -------------------
| | For
203,212,785 | Against
672,917,177 | Abstain
111,378,627
| |                 |                     |                    

| |  | There were
69,620,702 broker non-votes with reference to this item.
| |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------

55

---

| | (v) | Adoption
of Stockholder Proposal regarding separating the roles of Chairman and           Chief
Executive Officer:
| | --- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| |                 |                     |                  
| | --------------- | ------------------- | -----------------
| | For
388,881,257 | Against
592,691,191 | Abstain
5,936,141
| |                 |                     |                  

| |  | There were
69,620,702 broker non-votes with reference to this item.
| |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------

| | (vi) | Adoption
of Stockholder Proposal regarding the disclosure of political contributions:
| | ---- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| |                |                     |                    
| | -------------- | ------------------- | -------------------
| | For
71,352,334 | Against
814,943,945 | Abstain
101,212,310
| |                |                     |                    

| |  | There were
69,620,702 broker non-votes with reference to this item.
| |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------

| | (vii) | Adoption of
Stockholder Proposal regarding discontinuation of PREMARIN and protection of
mares:
| | ----- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| |                |                     |                    
| | -------------- | ------------------- | -------------------
| | For
14,467,152 | Against
845,352,137 | Abstain
127,689,300
| |                |                     |                    

| |  | There were
69,602,702 broker non-votes with reference to this item.
| |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------

# Item 5.
        Other Information

| | On
August 3, 2005, the Company entered into a $1,350.0 million, five-year revolving credit
facility to replace its existing three-year revolving credit facility scheduled to mature
in March 2006, in the form attached hereto as Exhibit 10.1, which is incorporated herein
by reference. On August 3, 2005, the Company also entered into an amendment to its
existing $1,747.5 million, five-year revolving credit facility scheduled to mature in
February 2009, in the form attached hereto as Exhibit 10.2, which is incorporated herein
by reference. The amendments to the existing facility generally mirror the provisions of
the new credit facility (other than the maturity date which remains February 2009),
including certain cost and rate reductions. The lenders under each facility consist of a
group of banks and other financial institutions named therein, with JPMorgan Chase Bank,
N.A. acting as administrative agent. The Company has other arms-length relationships with
the participating banks and financial institutions. The Company has not drawn any funds
from either the three-year credit facility that is being replaced or the existing
five-year facility. The proceeds from the credit facilities may be used for general
corporate and working capital purposes and to support commercial paper, if any.
| | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

56

---

# Item 6.
        Exhibits and Reports on Form 8-K

| | (a) | Exhibits
| | --- | --------

> Exhibit No.
>      (10.1) 
>              
>              
>      (10.2) 
>              
>              
>              
>      (12) 
>      (31.1) 
>              
>      (31.2) 
>              
>      (32.1) 
>              
>      (32.2)
> 
> Description
> Five-Year Credit Agreement, dated as of August 3, 2005, among the Company, the banks
> and other financial institutions from time to time parties thereto and JPMorgan
> Chase Bank, N.A., as administrative agent for the lenders thereto.
> First Amendment to Five-Year Credit Agreement, dated as of August 3, 2005, amending
> the agreement dated as of February 11, 2004, among the Company, the banks and other
> financial institutions from time to time parties thereto and JPMorgan Chase Bank,
> N.A., as administrative agent for the lenders thereto.
> Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges.
> Certification of disclosure as adopted pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
> Act of 2002.
> Certification of disclosure as adopted pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
> Act of 2002.
> Certification pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
> of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
> Certification pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
> of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

| | (b) | Reports on Form 8-K
| | --- | -------------------

| | The following Current Reports on Form 8-K were filed or furnished by the Company:
| | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | o | April 20, 2005 relating to furnishing Wyeth's earnings results for the 2005 first quarter
(Items 2.02 and 9.01 disclosure).
| | - | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | o | April 22, 2005 relating to the adoption of the 2005 Stock Incentive Plan
(Items 1.01 and 9.01 disclosure).
| | - | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | o | June 28, 2005 relating to furnishing information on Wyeth's 2005 earnings guidance
(Items 7.01 and 9.01 disclosure).
| | - | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | o | July 20, 2005 relating to furnishing Wyeth's earnings results for the 2005 second quarter
(Items 2.02 and 9.01 disclosure).
| | - | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

57

---

# Signature

Pursuant to the requirements of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Registrant has duly caused this report to be signed
on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.

| | Wyeth(Registrant)    By: /s/
              Paul J. Jones
          
Paul J. Jones
Vice President and Controller
(Duly Authorized Signatory
and Chief Accounting Officer) | 
| | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | 

Date: August 5, 2005

58

---

| | Exhibit Index
| | -------------

> Exhibit No.
>      (10.1) 
>              
>              
>      (10.2) 
>              
>              
>              
>      (12) 
>      (31.1) 
>              
>      (31.2) 
>              
>      (32.1) 
>              
>      (32.2)
> 
> Description
> Five-Year Credit Agreement, dated as of August 3, 2005, among the Company, the banks
> and other financial institutions from time to time parties thereto and JPMorgan
> Chase Bank, N.A., as administrative agent for the lenders thereto.
> First Amendment to Five-Year Credit Agreement, dated as of August 3, 2005, amending
> the agreement dated as of February 11, 2004, among the Company, the banks and other
> financial institutions from time to time parties thereto and JPMorgan Chase Bank,
> N.A., as administrative agent for the lenders thereto.
> Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges.
> Certification of disclosure as adopted pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
> Act of 2002.
> Certification of disclosure as adopted pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
> Act of 2002.
> Certification pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
> of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
> Certification pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
> of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

EX-1