Canada Drug Talk

Big Pharma Buys Democrats to Kill Reimportation Legislation

According to Washington Post Staff Writer Jeffrey H. Birnbaum, drug firms are now wooing Democrats to help defeat their drug reimportation bills:

"In the year since they took over on Capitol Hill, Democratic leaders have been unable to pass either a bill allowing reimportation of drugs from Canada or a measure requiring negotiation of drug prices under Medicare. Neither is likely to reach the president's desk this year. Lawmakers on both sides of these issues say the primary reason is the influence, now redirected, of the drug lobby."

One of the tricks Big Pharma uses is called "clogging the system" - they hire Democratic lobbyists from all the major firms to prevent opponents from using those consultancies.

Other tactics include:

• investing millions of dollars into Democratic goals
• increasing lobbying by 25% to $22 million last year
• forming alliances with every patient group it can find

Source Article:
Drug Firms Woo Democrats, Helping Defeat Their Bills

Editor's Note:

Politicians that get into bed with big pharma are:

• betraying the trust of the people they serve
• killing free competition
• poisoning the political process

If the drug industry is allowed to put politicians on both sides of the political spectrum into their pockets, our democratic system of government will be sicker than the millions without access to affordable drugs.

The health of our people and government is under attack but the TV news networks continue to debate: "Does Eliot Spitzer swallow?"

It is sad that they spend more time talking about politicans who sleep with a whore than they do about politicians who act like one.

Updated Privacy Policy

We have updated our privacy policy:

CanadaDrugTalk.com Privacy Policy

Political News and Commentary

Lately I have been spending a lot of time at Politics - Total Control.

It features political news, commentary and candidate comparisons.

Their political search engine gives you all the political news and commentary about any given issue with a single click.

Here are some of the issues I care about and search often:

big pharma

prescription drugs

healthcare

reimportation

Giuliani

In my opinion, Giuliani is the worst candidate - please do NOT vote for Giuliani.  I find his exploitation of 9-11 offensive and his use of fearmongering to keep grandparents from importing drugs from Canada despicable. In the past, he has been a mouthpiece for big pharma and I believe that he will continue to sacrifice the interests of public healthcare in order to increase profits for the prescription drug industry:

Giuliani has been Reduced to a Corporate Mouthpiece

The current administration sold us all out to the prescription drug industry by protecting big pharma from competition and barring the government from negotiating drug prices (the governments of all other industrialized nations negotiate drug prices and pay a fraction of what Americans pay for identical prescription drugs).  I believe that Giuliani will do the same or worse and pray that he never gets elected to any public office.

Joel Lexchin

"It is common knowledge that drug companies spend a lot on promotion... But even I didn't realize that the figure was as high as we estimate it is."

Joel Lexchin is with the School of Health Policy and Management, York University, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

In a report entitled The Cost of Pushing Pills: A New Estimate of Pharmaceutical Promotion Expenditures in the United States published in the Public Library of Science Medicine, authors Marc-André Gagnon and Joel Lexchin conclude:

"From this new estimate, it appears that pharmaceutical companies spend almost twice as much on promotion as they do on R&D. These numbers clearly show how promotion predominates over R&D in the pharmaceutical industry, contrary to the industry's claim. While the amount spent on promotion is not in itself a confirmation of Kefauver's depiction of the pharmaceutical industry, it confirms the public image of a marketing-driven industry and provides an important argument to petition in favor of transforming the workings of the industry in the direction of more research and less promotion."

Editor's Note:

The Kefauver referred to in the conclusion is Estes Kefauver, a former Senator who accused the prescription drug industry of predatory pricing and excessive marketing in the 1950's.  He launched a public review of the industry through the Senate's anti-trust and monopoly subcommittee.

Sources:

The Cost of Pushing Pills: A New Estimate of Pharmaceutical Promotion Expenditures in the United States by Marc-André Gagnon and Joel Lexchin (Public Library of Science Medicine)

Drug Companies Spend Nearly Double on Marketing Compared with Research: Study (The Canadian Press)

Jeffrey Light

"The argument that drug companies can be trusted to provide adequate safety information on their own products has been used by the pharmaceutical industry to fight against government regulation of consumer advertising.  Clearly such trust is misplaced.  As Abbott’s actions have demonstrated, drug companies will attempt to hide unfavorable safety information when they think nobody is watching.

Jeffrey Light is Executive Director of the Washington, D.C.-based advocacy group Patients not Patents.

Source: Abbott Laboratories Deletes Safety Concerns from Web (Patients not Patents Press Release)

Editor's Note: This company and many others like it were caught by WikiScanner.  WikiScanner was developed by Virgil Griffith, a researcher at the California Institute of Technology.  It reveals changes to an online encyclopedia by linking edits back to the computers from which they were done, using each computer’s unique IP address.

Related Links:

Patients not Patents

WikiScanner

Robert Bazell

"If anyone doubts the influence of drug company ads on patients and physicians — consider all those wasted billions of dollars for a pill that sells for more than six times as much as another drug that does the same thing, made by the same company."

Robert Bazell is Chief Science and Health Correspondent for NBC News.

Editor's Note: He is, of course, referring to AstraZeneca's Prilosec (costs about $30/month) and Nexium (costs about $200/month).  Nexium (the 'little purple pill') costs six times as much but is only 3 percent better at relieving symptoms.

Shame on AstraZeneca and double shame on the FDA top managers who approved this drug even though the officer assigned to the case concluded that the new drug offered no "significant clinical advance" over the old drug. Your actions wasted billions of dollars a year that could have been put to better use.

The Costly Side Effects of Nexium's Ad Blitz (NBC News)

Doctor Kurt Stange

"[Prescription drug ads are] really intruding onto the doctor-patient relationship... What the ads tend to do is take up time and energy during a visit that could otherwise be spent on things that are important to the patient."

Doctor Stange is professor of family medicine at Case Western Reserve University and editor of the Annals of Family Medicine.

Source: Could Drug Ads be Bad for Your Health? (ABC News)

Doctor Dominick Frosch

"The ads do rely almost universally on the consumers' emotions... Medical decisions shouldn't be about emotions. They should be on carefully weighed benefits, risks and costs."

Doctor Frosch is an assistant professor of general internal medicine at UCLA.  He also said:

"Doctors in surveys have said that they have provided drugs even when the prescription wasn't appropriate... If consumers were powerless in changing the views of the doctors, the pharmaceutical industry would not be spending money advertising to them. It works."

Source: Could Drug Ads be Bad for Your Health? (ABC News)

Editor's Note: Prescription drug advertising contributes to higher drug prices in the United States and is banned in nearly all other Western countries.  Please read Why are Canadian Drug Prices Lower? for details.

Joseph E Stiglitz

"Drug companies spend more on advertising and marketing than on research, more on research on lifestyle drugs than on life saving drugs, and almost nothing on diseases that affect developing countries only. This is not surprising. Poor people cannot afford drugs, and drug companies make investments that yield the highest returns."

Joseph E Stiglitz was chief economist of the World Bank from 1997 to 2000 and won the Nobel Prize for economics in 2001.

Source: Scrooge and Intellectual Property Rights (British Medical Journal)

David MacKay

"The bottom line in 2007 is that enrollment costs are going up substantially, drug coverage is declining and the brand name coverage in the doughnut hole is being eliminated... Medicare D is an insurance program, not a benefit. As consumption increases, so too will cost. The changes in 2007 clearly demonstrate the limitations of the program.

"Therefore, seniors are wise to re-evaluate their plans and consider online Canadian pharmacies... especially since Customs seizures are no longer an issue."

David MacKay is an international pharmacy expert and consultant.

Source: Media Release

Judge Throws Out Canadian Drug Lawsuit

A federal judge has thrown out Montgomery County's lawsuit arguing that the FDA unfairly barred it from importing lower cost prescription drugs from Canada for its employees.

County officials say they're reviewing their legal options and deciding their next move.

Source: Judge Throws Out Canadian Drug Lawsuit (Associated Press)

Tessa Hafen

"Jon Porter has failed to make prescription drugs more affordable... In fact, his votes in Congress have made drugs more expensive, while the drug companies make record profits."

Congressional candidate Tessa Hafen criticized her Republican opponent's support for recent federal Medicare legislation.

If elected, Hafen said she would allow the government to negotiate with drug makers and legalize the reimportation of medicines from Canada.

Source: Hafen Attacks Nevada Congressman for Medicare Vote (Associated Press)

Representative Louise Slaughter

While many have been left behind by Part D, there is a clear winner: the drug industry. Independent analysts predict that Part D will increase drug industry profits by $139 billion over the next eight years. Glaxo-SmithKline's second-quarter net income already jumped 14 percent, and other leading drug companies also have benefited.

The procedure used to pass Part D was the worst abuse of the legislative process I have seen during my 20 years in Congress. Powerful Republicans quashed conscientious amendments to the bill, including one requiring the administration to negotiate lower drug prices and another allowing Americans to import cheaper drugs from Canada. And during the conference process by which the House and Senate versions of legislation are reconciled, Democratic legislators were shut out, but lobbyists from the pharmaceutical industry were invited in.

Louise Slaughter represents the 28th District in the U.S. House of Representatives.

Source: Give Medicare Program Total Overhaul; Don't Just Fill 'Doughnut Hole' (The Rochester Democrat and Chronicle)

Representative Louise Slaughter

Recent criticisms of Part D have focused on the so-called "doughnut hole" rule in which beneficiaries must cover all annual expenses between $2,251 and $5,100 — a hole in their coverage. But while this flaw will cost patients money and is expected to hurt as many as 7 million seniors and people living with disabilities this year, it is just the tip of the iceberg.

Part D does not allow the administration to negotiate drug prices with pharmaceutical companies. These companies are charging taxpayers up to 80 percent more for drugs purchased under Part D than for those purchased under other plans. Furthermore, it prevents the re-importation of cheaper medications from Canada.

Louise Slaughter represents the 28th District in the U.S. House of Representatives.

Source: Give Medicare Program Total Overhaul; Don't Just Fill 'Doughnut Hole' (The Rochester Democrat and Chronicle)

Froma Harrop

"In case you haven't noticed, a large wall is being built around the American people to ensure that they remain prisoner to the drug industry. It's easy to understand why drug makers want to force Americans to buy their products in the United States. Ours is the only industrialized country that doesn't negotiate the prices the drug companies may charge. As a result, a 90-day supply of Fosamax sells for $105 in Canada but $210 here."

Froma Harrop is a Providence Journal columnist.

Source: Keeping Our Border Safe from Affordable Medication (Seattle Times)

Rex Wilmouth

"The 46 million uninsured (Americans) pay 60 percent more than the federal government pays for the same drugs. The uninsured pay about twice what they would pay for he same drugs at a Canadian pharmacy... Prescription drug pricing is out of control and puts needed medical treatment out of reach for too many Americans."

Rex Wilmouth is State Director of Colorado Public Interest Research Group.

Source: National Survey Shows Uninsured Americans Pay Higher Prices For Prescription Drugs - Uninsured Coloradans Paying Nearly Twice As Much As They Should (Colorado Public Interest Research Group)

Senator or Stain on Senate Floor - How Did Your Senator Vote on Drug Reimportation Amendment

Would you like to know how your senator voted on the prescription drug reimportation amendment?

According to the Vote Summary of U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 109th Congress - 2nd Session, those who voted for the ammendment outnumbered those who opposed it by over two to one.

Statement of Purpose:

To prohibit the United States Customs and Border Protection from preventing an individual not in the business of importing a prescription drug from importing an FDA-approved prescription drug.

Vote Counts:

YEAs: 68
NAYs: 32

Who voted for the ammendment?

Akaka (D-HI), Allard (R-CO), Baucus (D-MT), Bayh (D-IN), Biden (D-DE), Bingaman (D-NM), Boxer (D-CA), Brownback (R-KS), Burns (R-MT), Byrd (D-WV), Cantwell (D-WA), Carper (D-DE), Chafee (R-RI), Clinton (D-NY), Coburn (R-OK), Collins (R-ME), Conrad (D-ND), Craig (R-ID), Dayton (D-MN), DeMint (R-SC), Dodd (D-CT), Dorgan (D-ND), Durbin (D-IL), Feingold (D-WI), Feinstein (D-CA), Grassley (R-IA), Harkin (D-IA), Inhofe (R-OK), Inouye (D-HI), Jeffords (I-VT), Johnson (D-SD), Kennedy (D-MA), Kerry (D-MA), Kohl (D-WI), Landrieu (D-LA), Lautenberg (D-NJ), Leahy (D-VT), Levin (D-MI), Lieberman (D-CT), Lincoln (D-AR), Lott (R-MS), Lugar (R-IN), Martinez (R-FL), McCain (R-AZ), Menendez (D-NJ), Mikulski (D-MD), Murkowski (R-AK), Murray (D-WA), Nelson (D-FL), Nelson (D-NE), Obama (D-IL), Pryor (D-AR), Reed (D-RI), Reid (D-NV), Rockefeller (D-WV), Salazar (D-CO), Sarbanes (D-MD), Schumer (D-NY), Sessions (R-AL), Shelby (R-AL), Smith (R-OR), Snowe (R-ME), Specter (R-PA), Stabenow (D-MI), Talent (R-MO), Thune (R-SD), Vitter (R-LA) and Wyden (D-OR).

Thank you all for having the common sense and wisdom to protect our borders from real threats and to help grandparents throughout the US get safe, affordable prescription drugs from Canada.  You are all a credit to the Senate and politics in general.

Who voted against the ammendment?

Alexander (R-TN), Allen (R-VA), Bennett (R-UT), Bond (R-MO), Bunning (R-KY), Burr (R-NC), Chambliss (R-GA), Cochran (R-MS), Coleman (R-MN), Cornyn (R-TX), Crapo (R-ID), DeWine (R-OH), Dole (R-NC), Domenici (R-NM), Ensign (R-NV), Enzi (R-WY), Frist (R-TN), Graham (R-SC), Gregg (R-NH), Hagel (R-NE), Hatch (R-UT), Hutchison (R-TX), Isakson (R-GA), Kyl (R-AZ), McConnell (R-KY), Roberts (R-KS), Santorum (R-PA), Stevens (R-AK), Sununu (R-NH), Thomas (R-WY), Voinovich (R-OH) and Warner (R-VA).

Shame on you!

By wasting Homeland Security resources to protect Big Pharma's profits, you:

• endangered our country by exposing us to real terrorist threats
• betrayed the people of the state who voted for you hoping that you would protect the interests of the constituents, not those of corporations who put short-term profits ahead of long-term national health
• made grandparents suffer needlessly because the drugs they paid for were stolen by their own government at the Canadian border

In my opinion, the carrion who voted against this amendment are not Senators.

The word senate is derived from the Latin word senex (old man).

If anyone called me 'old man' to my face, they would be asking for one in the kisser.  If they quietly looked up 'old man' in a dictionary, however, there would probably be a picture of someone who looks a lot like me (not as virile and charming, mind you, but the similarities would outnumber the differences).

The meaning of the word senate comes from a simple social organization in which decision-making powers are reserved for the eldest men in a society.

Again, if you put me somewhere on a scale between youngest and eldest in our society, I would probably be closer to the latter.

While it would be unreasonable (and age discrimination) to expect only the eldest of our society to be voted into our Senate (we are a democracy, after all, and there are many Senators with wisdom beyond their years), you would think that the Senate would at least have the courtesy, wisdom and common sense to protect the interests of the eldest in our society - people on whose backs this nation was built.

If the Senate puts corporate profits over the interests of taxpayers who worked hard and, in some cases, risked life and limb for this nation, what kind of sacrifice can you expect from the next generation?

That is why I think the carrion who voted against this amendment are not Senators.  They ignored the immediate interests of the eldest in our society.  More importantly, they betrayed the long-term interests of our nation by showing that personal sacrifices for the good of the nation are not repaid in kind but campaign contributions are.

Simply put, the short-sighted slugs who voted against the amendment are not Senators but stains on the Senate floor.

Hopefully there will be a clean-up on aisle five when their seats are up for election.

Source: US Senate Roll Call Votes

Senator Vitter Follows Through

Vitter Shows Off His Follow-through (Source: The Shreveport Times)

Give US Senator David Vitter credit for pushing ahead on one of his key campaign issues by working to loosen the borders for the importation of cheaper prescription drugs from Canada.

Vitter... engineered passage of a Canadian loophole on a Food and Drug Administration ban regarding the importation of prescription medicine....  while sold more cheaply to Canadian and other foreign markets, are often made in the same factories.

Senator Judd Gregg

"If I were a creative terrorist, I would say to myself, 'Hey, listen, all I've got to do is produce a can here that says 'Lipitor' on it, make it look like the original Lipitor bottle, which isn't too hard to do, fill it with anthrax.'"

Senator Judd Gregg said the proposal to let Canadian drugs into the US was "...creating a massive hole on our capacity to secure our borders and protect ourselves."

Source: Senate Relents on Canada Drug Imports (Associated Press)

Editor's Response:

If I were a creative terrorist...

If you were a creative terrorist?

Senator Gregg, a creative terrorist would do their homework.   A creative terrorist would know that drugs from Canada are factory sealed.  A creative terrorist would know that it would be easier to introduce poisoned drugs into the system using an American pharmacy (where pills are still counted).

Fortunately for those of us who live in the real world, a creative terrorist would also know that one does not maximize fear by poisoning people one bottle of pills at a time.

Speaking of pills, I am sorry but I have to ask:

When you dreamed up your clever Lipitor scheme, Senator Gregg, were you on the same pills Lester Crawford probably was on when he said Terrorists may Tamper with Prescription Drugs from Canada?

That was back in 2004!

Creative terrorist?  You are not even a creative senator.

Playing the terror card?  Using fear against grandparents trying to make ends meet by importing prescription drugs from Canada?

Shame on you, Senator Gregg! At 59 years of age you should know better.

Just so you know: Baseless scare-tactics won't work against us.  Unlike you, we do our homework.

And the next time you think of trying to use fear as a weapon against us, remember that it takes a bit of courage, a lot of hard work and a fair bit of brains to get to our age.

People enjoying life after sixty are survivors, not suckers.

We just don't scare that easily, Mr. Senator.

Senate Passes Drug Reimportation Amendment

Senate Passes Drug Reimportation Amendment (Source: The Hill)

Supporters of drug reimportation notched a win yesterday when the Senate passed a bill that would prohibit federal funds from being used to confiscate prescription drugs from Canada.

The measure passed 68-32, with no opposition from Democrats.