Topic
Love The Tyee? We need your support. Become a Tyee Builder for as little as $5/month.
Province went from best to worst in evaluating pharmaceuticals, charges Canadian Health Coalition official.
Deputy Minister Dyble: Letter updates stakeholders on controversial revamp.
Campbell government hosted closed meetings.
Ministry's push to disband Therapeutics Initiative 'lacks substantive evidence.'
Risks said to rise as pharma helps OK drugs for use in province now.
British Columbia has corrupted its drug review process, making changes that will cost lives and money.
That's the assessment of an Ottawa-based health advocate on the eve of a closed government-hosted meeting in Vancouver to update stakeholders on changes to how the provincial government assesses new pharmaceuticals.
"When you corrupt a drug review process you are jeopardizing lives," said Michael McBane, the national coordinator of the Canadian Health Coalition. "There's something fundamentally, deeply unethical about all this. It's a massive violation of the public trust."
The changes in B.C. will have national implications, he said. "Many provinces were emulating British Columbia."
The health services ministry is hosting a third Annual Multilateral Stakeholder Engagement Session Nov. 24 at the Fairmont Hotel in Vancouver. The meeting will include, according to the invitation, a review of work done to complete recommendations from the Pharmaceutical Task Force, a "forward-looking presentation" from deputy minister John Dyble and a panel discussion on the future of pharmacy and pharmaceutical services.
That task force, struck three years ago, was stacked with people with ties to the pharmaceutical industry, The Tyee reported at the time. The person who led that review, Don Avison, has since taken a global advisory position with the drug company Pfizer.
More drug industry involvement
In a Sept. 30 letter from Dyble to stakeholders, distributed as an update ahead of the meeting, a chart said 10 of the task force's 12 recommendations had been completed, while the other two had been substantially completed.
"Acting on task force recommendations, the Ministry of Health Services (the Ministry) has substantively increased inputs, sponsor contact points and transparency within the drug review process, while reducing historic review timelines," Dyble's letter said.
"There are now four separate sponsor engagement points within the enhanced review process, including an opportunity to comment both pre-and-post Drug Benefit Council recommendation and pre-and-post Ministry decision."
"There's a bloody euphemism if ever I heard one," said McBane, noting "sponsor engagement" won't help patients. "That means more involvement for the drug industry."
Companies will now have four separate spots in the approval process where they can gain access to the decision makers, he said. "The only thing that's transparent is it's now totally corrupted," he said. "B.C. has gone from having the best process on drug review to the worst."
Dyble's letter also noted the government has continued to try to accelerate drug reviews.
The government continues to move away from using the Therapeutics Initiative at the University of British Columbia to look at the evidence on new drugs, he noted, though it hasn't gone as quickly as the government had hoped.
"Due to concerns over the low response rate to our 2009 Request for Proposals, we have undertaken a new procurement process to establish this roster," he said. When a new contract is in place the existing relationship with UBC will end, he said.
Input from patients
Dyble also gave stakeholders a preview of an announcement that wasn't made public until last week. "B.C. has gone beyond the recommendations of the Pharmaceutical Task Force and as of this fall will be one of the few jurisdictions in Canada to have a formal process to consider patient perspectives as part of the drug review process," he wrote.
"Individual patients, caregivers and patient groups will have the opportunity to provide their perspective regarding a drug under review, and this input will be considered by the Drug Benefit Council as they formulate their listing recommendations."
The government continues to look at changing how it does drug review, Dyble's letter said. "We would also like to take advantage of the experience and expertise at the November 24 session to discuss and consider new priorities as we move beyond implementation of the Pharmaceutical Task Force recommendations."
British Columbia is damaging what has been one of the best drug review processes in the country, said McBane. The province spends about 20 per cent less than the rest of Canada on drugs, he said, attributing the difference in large part to the involvement of the Therapeutics Initiative.
The task force came out of Premier Gordon Campbell's office, McBane said. "Is he trying to bankrupt the British Columbia department of health?" he asked. "This whole thing is outrageous from a patient safety perspective and also a value for money perspective."
'Negligence bordering on criminality'
The TI has brought an independent approach to drug reviews and has maintained strict conflict of interest standards, McBane said. "Many others who engage in this research are prepared to sell their opinions," he said. "The number of scientists working in the public interest is shrinking."
To illustrate that the change will cost lives, McBane cited Vioxx (a case The Tyee explored in a 2007 article), which the TI recommended against prescribing at a time before Merck & Co. withdrew the drug from the market because it increased the risk of heart attacks and strokes.
TI's recommendation saved hundreds of lives, said McBane. "That's more than a jumbo jet crashing. That's what that means."
Removing TI from the review process and increasing the input from industry will cost lives in the future, he said. "They will expedite the marketing of dangerous drugs that will kill people."
The government is saying speed on drug reviews is more important than safety, McBane said. "I consider that negligence bordering on criminality."
Nor does he like Dyble's suggestion that patients will have more sway on what drugs are paid for by the province. Such decisions should be made based on evidence, he said, not "the notion that drug formulary decisions are a popularity contest."
He said he hopes the province will yet reverse its drug review decisions. "It's never too late to correct a mistake."
Meeting closed to public
Health Services minister Kevin Falcon, expected to announce a campaign to lead the B.C. Liberals, was unavailable for an interview.
A ministry spokesperson provided an emailed statement about the meeting, which is closed to the public. "This is a stakeholder only event in order to encourage frank and open discussion on the subject matter," it said.
The changes are aimed at expanding input into the drug review process, it said. "Prior to the recommendations, there was minimum involvement with practicing clinicians and the use of evidence review experts was limited to clinical evidence reviews by the UBC Faculty of Medicine group, the Therapeutics Initiative."
The request for qualifications for clinical evidence reviewers went out in August and the competition is now closed, it said, adding that an announcement is expected early in 2011.
A report last week from the Health Council of Canada argued for removing conflict of interest from drug review decisions, NDP health critic Adrian Dix said. "The decision of the government to sideline the Therapeutics Initiative from the drug review process seems more and more incongruous, even outrageous," he said. "At a time when everyone's looking to emulate the TI, the [B.C.] government's going in the other direction."
An NDP government would increase support for the TI, he said, adding it's not surprising the province has had a hard time finding a qualified replacement. "Not only is the TI the leading agency of its kind in North America, but it's cost efficient."
The changes to the review process seem spurred by the B.C. Liberal Party's obligations to the drug industry, which has donated tens of thousands of dollars in recent years, said Dix. "It is inexplicable otherwise."
A call to Russell Williams, a Pharmaceutical Task Force member and president of the drug industry lobby group Rx & D was not returned by publishing time. ![[Tyee]](http://thetyee.cachefly.net/ui/img/ico_fishie.png){kind=small}
33
Login or register to post comments
frank2
2 years ago
The last sentence refers to
The last sentence refers to Task Force member Russell Williams. I thought he had been jailed -- or, wait, the jailed guy killed only 2 people.
Van Isle
2 years ago
So, the question has got to
So, the question has got to asked; where the hell is Carole James? She should be front and centre, screaming bloody-murder and lighting her hair on fire.
verso
2 years ago
Van Isle
"She should be front and centre, screaming bloody-murder and lighting her hair on fire."
If by front and centre you mean in the media she has to be asked first.
Did the The Tyee ask for the Carol James or NDP's position on this? The article at the Sun didn't. I don't think this was even covered on last night's news.
To date there's no press release or mention of the story on the BC NDP's website, then again the story just broke yesterday. Perhaps they're working on it. Perhaps not. I sure hope they are.
What more should Carol James do to be front and centre on issues like this if the media won't ask for the party's position? I don't ask to be a jerk, I ask because I sincerely want know what more the NDP and Carol James can do.
kl
2 years ago
Verso
Verso, you make some good points but James shouldn't need to be asked. She should be on top of everything the Liberals are up to and then calling news conferences to make her opinions, and her policies known. If James wants to win British Columbians over she can't sit back and wait for the media to come to her. This has been a serious flaw of hers and it is a reason why if she is still leader of the NDP in 2013 I won't vote for them.
When bloggers like Laile Yuile are making more of a fuss over the state of affairs in BC than the NDP is then you know our political systems is a mess.
David Beers
2 years ago
Verso, please read entire story
The Tyee did indeed seek and get the NDP position on this. Here is the last part of the piece above
A report last week from the Health Council of Canada argued for removing conflict of interest from drug review decisions, NDP health critic Adrian Dix said. "The decision of the government to sideline the Therapeutics Initiative from the drug review process seems more and more incongruous, even outrageous," he said. "At a time when everyone's looking to emulate the TI, the [B.C.] government's going in the other direction."
An NDP government would increase support for the TI, he said, adding it's not surprising the province has had a hard time finding a qualified replacement. "Not only is the TI the leading agency of its kind in North America, but it's cost efficient."
The changes to the review process seem spurred by the B.C. Liberal Party's obligations to the drug industry, which has donated tens of thousands of dollars in recent years, said Dix. "It is inexplicable otherwise."
A call to Russell Williams, a Pharmaceutical Task Force member and president of the drug industry lobby group Rx & D was not returned by publishing time.
verso
2 years ago
The Tyee....
Did in fact ask the NDP for this article. Dix was quoted above... I must remember to read the whole article before posting.
I wish other media in this province were as thorough.
verso
2 years ago
Yes...
I realized that after I posted. My apologies, David.
Warren Bell MD
2 years ago
Mike McBane is correct
This latest act by the current government represents a radical change for the worse for one the most respected, rigorous and valuable public bodies in this province, the Therapeutics Initiative (TI). The TI has protected health and saved lives, as well as saving large sums of public money and setting a high standard for accurate and independent drug assessment that is appreciated around the world. Yet now, in keeping with its relentless pro-corporate, anti-science stance, the Liberal government is trying to finesse a watering down of the rigour and precision of the TI's process, and insert the obscenely profitable drug industry into the assessment mix. Doing so will corrupt the independence and social value of the TI, and make it yet another tool for enhancing shareholder profit, at the expense of society as a whole.
The ideological commitment to the "magic of the marketplace", so beloved of governments north and south of the 49th Parallel, has no basis in fact. Corporations promote corporate interests -- profits for their shareholders -- not the interests of society as a whole.
Marcia Angell, for 20 years editor of the New England Journal of Medicine, where she watched drug industry behaviour up close, wrote the following, in 2008: "Physicians can no longer rely on the medical literature for valid and reliable information" because it is dominated by "industry-sponsored research".
Would I trust Russell Williams, chief drug industry lobbyist, to act in my best interest, if it conflicted with industry's profitability? Of course I wouldn't, and neither should our government. If it does, then I suspect either extraordinary naivete, or corruption. If it's something else, Mr. John Dyble, then convince me.
"He who pays the piper calls the tune" -- an idea as old as human consciousness.
mmills
2 years ago
where is the NDP outrage?
the sound of NDP silence on this is deafening.
Skywalker
2 years ago
Re: John Dyble
Didn't he once work under Dan Doyle who wrote the blueprint for this change for the liberals?
Camero409
2 years ago
mmills
Did you not read the whole document or the posts above? The outrage is there. Dix sent a email last week regarding this to me and others on his email list. You can subscribe to it as well....unless......??
greengreen
2 years ago
Balance
As much as I like this article and as much as I agree with essence of what is being said, I would like the Tyee to publish an article from someone on the other side of the issue so that a debate can ensue. Are there any points to be made in support of this new approach? Was the initial process 100% correct and this new idea 100% wrong? Or the other way around?
offended
2 years ago
There's a new drug on the market
for folks with atrial fibrillation (an irregular heartbeat) that requires patients to take blood thinners, so that they don't get blood clots and as a consequence, have a stroke.
The medication can be taken in place of warfarin (coumadin). The drug was approved by Health Canada this.
It has less side effects than warfarin, doesn't require monthly or weekly blood tests (like warfarin does) but the province
hasn't done anything to approve it as a covered drug under Pharmacare. In the long run, it costs the medical system less money.
Ridiculous. This drug needs to be reviewed NOW.
But it isn't made by a North American company. Could that be the problem?
Peter Dimitrov
2 years ago
Thumbs up to TI, Adrian Dix, Andrew McLeod & the Tyee!
To the Therapeutics Initiative (TI)and to Adrian Dix,as well as to the author of this article and The Tyee for posting it.
Sponsor engagement of Big Pharma - such BS 'newspeak' words. TI needs public support and more funding now. Dismantle the Lieberals drug review process asap I say.
SharingIsGood
2 years ago
MLA Moira Stilwell - Liberal Leader Candidate
It has been obvious to me, a layman, that the changes the BC Liberals have been making to the way drugs are reviewed in BC are unethical at the least, possibly criminal. I wonder why our own MLA Dr. Moira Stilwell has been silent on this issue? If she is fit to lead, certainly, as a physician, she should have been protesting the changes that her own party was making. It seems to me that Colin Hansen was Minister of Health Services when lots of these changes were taking place. How could a medical doctor, like Moira Stillwell sit by when this legislation was being created in Hansen's ministry? To whom has been her loyalty - Campbell or the people of BC?
mcccarthy
2 years ago
The NDP have been on this
The NDP have been on this issue for three years and this includes Carole James. It is not the NDPs fault that mainstream media refuses to print anything they say. This creates the image that the party is ineffective and judging by some of the above comments, many are fooled by this. In this day of media concentration/monopoly it is naive to equate a party's silence with space given in the media. If you want to see what really goes on you will have to check out hansard. It is grand to watch James take a BCliberal to task.
samuidave (not verified)
2 years ago
3 years and 878 stories posted on the NDP website
mcccarthy ~ The NDP have been on this issue for three years and this includes Carole James. It is not the NDPs fault that mainstream media refuses to print anything they say ..."
Three years, you say? Well let's go see what the BC NDP party website has been reporting, free of charge no less, for the last three years on this topic, AVAILABLE HERE.
In 2010, 150 press release stories and exactly ZERO covering the Big Pharma issue.
In 2009, 326 press release stories and exactly ZERO covering the Big Pharma issue.
In 2008, 402 press release stories and exactly ZERO covering the Big Pharma issue.
I did a site search for Big Pharma, Drug Review and Pharmaceutical, and came up blank. I searched by the topical reference points:
Headlines Accountability Advanced Education Affordability Budget Child Care Children Climate Change Communities Consumer Affairs Crime Economy Education Energy Environment Families Farm Workers Ferries Forest Jobs Forestry Gas Tax Health Care Homelessness Housing Minimum wage Party Leader Poverty Privatization Provincial Election Public Safety Rural communities Seniors' care Seniors' health Taxes Transit Transparency Working conditions --
and again came up with zip.
It appears to me, and unless you care to show me otherwise, mccarthy, that it IS the NDP's fault if they fail to print anything they need to say, for free, on their own web page.
Mind you, I did find some stories on things like the necessity of keeping the Hockey Night in Canada theme song, the Liberal Party's lousy website, and the need to stand up for women ski jumpers. And it became abundantly clear to me that the NDP party has no platform or direction forward, though I don't think this was the intended objective of its page. I guess perusing nearly 1000 stories, which the Party feels necessary to post, is more telling than they think.
G West
2 years ago
Ummm?
Maybe you haven't looked around carefully enough?
http://www.adriandix.ca/media_highlights.php
http://thetyee.ca/News/2008/12/01/DrugApproval/
http://www.straight.com/article-280438/vancouver/falcon-and-big-pharma-target-research-group
How many times does one have to mention that the party is basically broke?
Is it asking citizens too much to actually DO A LITTLE HUNTING ON THEIR OWN?
It took me less than 1 minute to find those examples -
samuidave (not verified)
2 years ago
Of course G West misses the point ...
simply because he does chooses not to see it.
In point form:
First, the concern was the party is broke.
Second, the concern was the mainstream media is not reporting on the NDP.
Third, the NDP has been all over this topic for three years.
It follows,
ONE LOGICAL SOLUTION: Use the NDP's 'free' website to convey the message to the public it wants heard especially IF the media is not giving you coverage.
And citing my original post, "Three years, you say? Well let's go see what the BC NDP party website has been reporting, free of charge no less, for the last three years on this topic."
[OFFENSIVE COMMENT DIRECTED AT ANOTHER COMMENTER REMOVED. -MODERATOR.]
John Greg
2 years ago
It Is To Laugh ...
From the article:
Well, duh! And welcome to the BC Liberal Party and its standard operating procedures.
G West
2 years ago
What are you talking about?
I'm not defending anyone.
I simply posted some information to demonstrate that YOU hadn't done your homework.
Adrian Dix, an NDP MLA, has been at the sharp end of the fight to maintain the Therapeutics Initiative for years...
Furthermore, if you think keeping a website up and running is 'free' then you really need to get out more.
Cheers,
(I'll resist the temptation to say something offensive about you and your 'beliefs'.)
samuidave (not verified)
2 years ago
OMG, G West, ...
the topic is not whether there is some information out there connecting the NDP with the Big Pharma story . The issue is whether, on the premise that the MSM is not reporting the NDP story and the party is broke, the NDP IS DOING ITS BEST to put forth its position on the story.
If it cannot report this story on its own webpage once in three years, yet can give us stories about the crappy Liberal website or the HNIC theme song, one is probably, and quite reasonably, left wondering about its priorities.
As for the costs of submitting a seemingly important story onto its already up-and-running web site, it would be nominal. And even if we assume there is a larger than nominal fiscal burden on the party, how should one reconcile the submission of the HNIC theme song with the absence of the Big Pharma story? Clearly there is a disconnect between what the NDP feels it is worth funding and the news events of serious import.
If you are not defending the NDP, I wonder what was your point presuming you thought you were making an on-topic remark?
As for your remark, "I'll resist the temptation to say something offensive about you and your 'beliefs'", bring it on if you think you can. I welcome being shown the error of my thinking from one and all. Just be prepared to defend your assertion, if incorrect, with some on-topic reasoning, factually supported.
G West
2 years ago
Touche
That's exactly what I did my friend.
I was simply responding to your rather ill-informed conclusion.
I suggest you download the party's complete platform if you really want to explore what it is promising to do or not to do.
As I said, I'm not defending the NDP. I'm not a member - I do have some respect for the truth though.
Maybe you should read what Adrian Dix has actually been saying on the subject before you assume anything.
Cheers.
samuidave (not verified)
2 years ago
Your respect for the 'truth' , G West, would therefore ...
lead you to agree, quite conclusively, that the NDP Party website does not make the Big Pharma topic a story it deems worthy of in the main Newsroom tab on its party website, correct?
So, out of curiosity and on your advice, I went to the party website to do exactly what you suggested -- to download a copy of its platform. Finding such a fundamental document on its website should be no trouble, I mean, if the NDP really wanted the people to know where it stands on issues, no? Perhaps you can direct me along, tab by tab, where this party platform is located on its webpage.
So, I did a simple google search and got a quick hit:
http://www.bcndp.ca/files/u108/BCNDP09_Platform_2009-_Final-April9_last3.pdf
After perusing 56 pages of party policy, I found not a word addressing the Big Pharma issue. And after working the link backwards to try finding its locaton on the NDP website, I got this return:
The website declined to show this webpage
HTTP 403
Most likely causes:
•This website requires you to log in.
The problem, G West, in case I have not made it clear, is that it is difficult, perhaps impossible, to locate something as fundamental as the NDP Party Platform on its site, let alone find its stand on Big Pharma over the last three years there. (I did find 8 pages of links devoted to the piss-poor Liberal government in the Newsroom Reality Checks tab; I wonder if this the NDP's idea of sound vision - pure criticism?)
So the original claim -- a broke party, a failing MSMedia, and 3 years of the NDP being all over this issue -- shows the NDP is far from competently trying to get this story into the light. It fails to post about it on its own website, and it even fails to address it in its party platform policy of 2009.
Adrian Dix may be a fine fellow and doing what he can, but the NDP party is, at best, failing him as well by not assisting with getting his message out. The truth is, the party isn't even trying to help. It is more concerned wuth slagging the misfit, criminal gang of Liberals than in offering BC a real solution and vision forward, imo.
G West
2 years ago
I guess you don't listen to CBC Radio
Over the past three days, here in Victoria, they have hosted a series of three interviews on the subject of the Therapeutics Initiative and the mew drug review body appointed by Minister Falcon.
Both Falcon and Dix were interviewed, as was an independent health expert who discussed the subject in detail and why the current policy direction is a betrayal and bastardization of the NDP policy which created Pharmacare and the provincial drug formulary in the first place.
In truth my friend, if you weren't so fascinated by the idea that we're going to be 'saved' by an army of independent philosophers you might find there are people out there working cooperatively to try and find some actual solutions to this province's problems.
As for the problems with the NDP's website - I think I mentioned that the party has serious money problems.
That's what happens when you don't have an army of Daddy Warbucks in your back pocket writing cheques for you.
samuidave (not verified)
2 years ago
My appeal to elect Independents, as a start, ...
is not a fascination, it is a suggestion to others to rethink how politics works. It is one step, philosophically fundamental, toward a democracy. Here is a link to a Chomsky interview regarding economics and democracy which buttresses my simple suggestion -- policy decisions and representation must come from the grassroots in a functioning democracy. Today's party politics does not work in that fashion.
http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=5902
Again, for the last time, the issue is whether the NDP party is doing all it can, given its limited budget, to advance this Big Pharma issue over the last three years. Clearly not.
And thanks for repeatedly missing the point of the discussion.
G West
2 years ago
And, equally clearly
I disagree. AND, I'm convinced you miss not only the point of this discussion BUT nearly every other one you've contributed to.
The NDP is the opposition - we'll discuss their culpability for 'doing something' about BIG PHARMA when they're in power.
Deal?
Until then, the suggestion that any opposition party in this country has much traction with respect to this issue is just plain silly.
Almost as silly as the idea that a pack of squabbling independents would be in improvement on our current, often dysfunctional, democratic system.
Cheers. BTW I've been a big fan of Chomsky for years but I'm not convinced his ideas of grassroots functionality are any closer to reality than they were when he began his career as a gadfly.
I like Ralph Nader too - but he's less likely than Sarah Palin to ever be president of the USA.
Sad I know - but just another part of living in the REAL WORLD and not a pretend one
Adrian Dix
2 years ago
BC NDP Has Been Leading this fight Part 1
A number of responses to this excellent article by Andrew MacLeod ask where the BC NDP and/or Carole James have been on the issue of the drug review process and the Therapeutics Initiative. For over three years, New Democrats have been constantly advocating in the press and the legislature the need to protect the Therapeutics Initiative and BC’s standing as a national leader in drug policy. The fact that the Canadian Health Coalition is now involved is a good thing and an indication of growing success in building public support for our position.
We have taken on this issue and The Tyee and the mainstream media have paid attention. Here is the recent record:
NDP leader Carole James has expressed her unequivocal support for the TI on a number of occasions, including most recently during her November 10 address to the Life Sciences Association of British Columbia, whose members include major pharmaceutical companies operating in BC http://www.bcndpcaucus.ca/en/caroles_speech_at_the_life_sciences_bc_breakfast_speakers_series_in_vancouver.
Carole and the BC NDP also included in the recent election platform plans to significantly expand the grant to the TI, which was first established by a NDP government.
My own week began with raising TI’s track record on CKNW (Sunday, November 21, 7:50 pm, http://www.cknw.com/other/audiovault.html). Since November 2009, New Democrats have raised over 40 times in radio, television, print and online coverage how the BC Liberals were working to weaken the province’s drug review process. This issue goes to the heart of our prescription drug plan for the province.
This past year is not unusual and a review of 2007-08 and 2008-09 would show a similar record.
Below is an abbreviated shortlist of some of the press coverage, releases and opinion pieces New Democrats have generated as part of the effort to preserve BC independent drug watchdog, starting with when we uncovered through estimates debate that Minister Falcon was continuing George Abbott’s work to sideline TI’s central role in reviewing drug submissions
(http://www.leg.bc.ca/hansard/39th1st/h91124p.htm#2765)
http://thetyee.ca/Blogs/TheHook/Health/2009/11/24/TherapeuticInitiative/ , November 24, 2009.
“Health research cuts are a sign of an ailing system”, Adrian Dix, Special to the Sun http://www.vancouversun.com/opinion/op-ed/Health+research+cuts+sign+ailing+system/2292478/story.html#ixzz16R14AxC9,
December 2, 2009
“Health Services Minister Kevin Falcon and Big Pharma target research group”,http://www.straight.com/article-280438/vancouver/falcon-and-big-pharma-target-research-group,January 14, 2010
Ø
“Therapeutics Initiative's Warnings Prove Correct, But B.C. Liberals Sideline Independent Watchdog”
(http://www.bcndpcaucus.ca/en/therapeutics_initiatives_warnings_prove_correct_but_b_c_liberals_sideline_independent_watchdog
Adrian Dix
2 years ago
And Part 2
This past Spring, in support of TI we organized a major press conference with distinguished medical experts such as Dr Jerome Kassirer, former editor-in-chief of the New England Journal of Medicine and professor at Tufts University School of Medicine, Dr Sidney Wolfe, and Dr. Andrew Herxheimer, and Alan Cassels from UVic:
>”Alarm raised over move to scuttle drug review process. Some medical experts say the move by the provincial government to sideline an independent body that reviews pharmaceutical products in B.C. will cost more, cause more drug complications and may even put lives at risk”.Vancouver Sun, April 8, 2010
http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/westcoastnews/story.html?id=38168e34-b0fc-417d-bd98-a5b37ff46207
> “International experts rally to defence of B.C.'s threatened drug review panel,” Globe and Mail, April 8, 2010
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/british-columbia/international-experts-rally-to-defence-of-bcs-threatened-drug-review-panel/article1527090/
These efforts served to limit the damage to the TI caused by the government’s misguided attack. In May, in response to NDP questions during estimates, the BC Liberals conceded they would not strip TI of its role in educating physicians and monitoring drugs for their efficacy and adverse effects after they enter the market (http://www.leg.bc.ca/hansard/39th2nd/h00527a.htm#5870).
http://thetyee.ca/Blogs/TheHook/BC-Politics/2010/05/28/DrugBody/
Ø
Our effort to protect the TI’s role in the drug submission review process has continued over the summer and fall:
>Drug Conflicts - http://mondaymag.com/articles/entry/public-eye-september-2/ September 2, 2010
>Conflict of Interest 'Infects' BC Drug Review Panel: Critics –
http://thetyee.ca/News/2010/10/04/DrugReviewConflict/ ; Oct 4,2010
Canada’s Health Council Reaffirms That B.C. Liberals Should Expand Programs That Tackle Over-Prescribing: Dix
http://www.bcndpcaucus.ca/en/canada_s_health_council_reaffirms_that_b_c_liberals_should_expand_programs_that_tackle_over_prescribing_dix
> New research shows B.C. Liberals should expand programs to counter over-prescribing: Dix
http://www.bcndpcaucus.ca/en/canada_s_health_council_reaffirms_that_b_c_liberals_should_expand_programs_that_tackle_over_prescribing_dix
We are going to continue the fight to oppose the Falcon/Abbott changes to the drug review process, changes that will damage the safety and integrity of our system. As always, we need all the support we can get and ask everyone - critical of the NDP or no - to make his or her voice heard.
samuidave (not verified)
2 years ago
G West and Adrian Dix are still missing the point
First, G West, you are embarassing yourself in attacking my ability to formulate a cogent argument. Further, I make no deals with you because you have proven to me, repeatedly, unable to stay on topic. And even further, you prefer to play 'talking-point splattergun' rather than defend your position, or, conversely, oppose another's, by using facts coupled with accepted forms of logic.
For example,you prefer to stray off topic: "The NDP is the opposition - we'll discuss their culpability for 'doing something' about BIG PHARMA when they're in power", when the 'something' in issue is whether the NDP has its position on the matter posted on its website; or you make sweeping generalities: "I'm convinced you miss not only the point of this discussion BUT nearly every other one you've contributed to; yet not once do you state what 'the point' of the discussion is. I proposed an issue, clearly and unequivocally putting it forth in the most mechanical fashion. Were you unable to see how such an issue came about?
Well, the issue flowed quite naturally from the allegations discussed by the posters before me: (i) the NDP's lack of money to get heard widely; (ii) an uncooperative mainstream media, and (iii) the NDP allegedly being ALL over the topic. I simply took these allegations to task and argued that if ALL these facts were the case, the NDP should have this information at least on its website. It does not.
Compounding this topical omission on its website, it came to light that it is not easy, perhaps impossible, to find the NDP party policy either. I think this is further proof that the NDP is not doing what it can to help itself be heard if, in fact, it seriously is concerned about this topic. If it is not, as a party, then its course of action on its website to date makes sense.
Returning to the issue at hand -- whether the NDP has addressed the Big Pharma issue on its website to help itself get its message out, it is quite obvious it has not.
Now I do not expect Adrian Dix to publicly agree with me that the party is failing him and his efforts by not having this important issue on the website. That sort of behaviour is not readily tolerated in party politics.
But if we find a story on the NDP website on the Big Pharma topic in the near future, we will know it was either sheer coincidence or that Mr Dix had the problem resolved. And if we do not find a story, one has to reconsider the priorities of the party knowing women ski-jumpers and theme songs to TV programs have found a voice there.
G West
2 years ago
@samuidave
Please, give it up, you're embarrassing yourself.
Neither Adrian Dix nor the NDP 'opposition' are failing anyone - except in your imagination.
Find another hobby horse - this one's dead!
samuidave (not verified)
2 years ago
I give up, G West
... your repeated assaults against sound, logical reason and good sense overwhelm my desire to be engaged with you on any specific issue. I will govern myself accordingly in the future regarding anything you post.
G West
2 years ago
Feeling's mutual my friend
You reap what you sow.
Have a nice 'independent' weekend.