Prescriptions And Profit_CBS News 60 Minutes Tue, 16 Mar 2004
“Americans pay far more for their prescription drugs than citizens of any place on Earth.”
That’s because “The United States is the only industrialized country without some form of control on the prices of drugs.” No wonder the U.S. accounts for more than half of the industry’s profits.
The Washington Post reports that “Few industries can boast the sales trends seen in the pharmaceutical industry. Since the mid-1990s, drug manufacturers have enjoyed average annual sales increases of 10 percent.” This is in large part thanks to the industry’s hefty donations to elected officials’ campaign chests.
By purchasing drugs in Canada, consumers and state and city governments can save between 30 and 70 per cent of the cost of drugs. The major obstacle for US taxpayers is the FDA which has become the pharmaceutical industry’s government enforcer.
To ensure the continued fleecing of the US taxpayers, the administration is promoting its Medicare prescription drug plan–which is nothing more than the transfer of $600 billion from US taxpayers to the drug industry. The Medicare package deal prohibits state and city governments from negotiating for the best drug prices–as is normal in free market competition.
To promote the Medicare drug industry give away, the administration has taken a leaf from that industry by promoting the Medicare program like drug products are promoted: Advertisements in the guise of news reports have been planted in the media in an effort to convince the American public that this profit enhancement program for industry is good for us.
On Sunday, March 14, CBS News 60 Minutes focused on the price gouging issue, efforts by citizens, governors and mayors to save costs, and on the campaign contributions that led to the approval of the Medicare package deal. None of the invited drug manufacturers accepted an invitation to give their side. Instead, FDA’s outgoing commissioner, Dr. Mark McClellan, who will be heading the Medicare prescription drug program, tried but failed to explain why the same drugs–from the same manufacturers–are less safe when sold in Canada at half (and less) the price than if sold in the US? Or, why the US taxpayer should pay more for prescription drugs than anyone else on earth?
Americans who cannot afford to pay the high US cost for drugs will either stop taking medications or will increasingly end up putting their health at risk by becoming human test subjects in clinical trials testing new drugs. If those drugs are approved, they will most likely not be able to afford them either.
Washington Post: “A hard reality is Americans subsidize drug usage around the world.”
See: The WASHINGTON POST. 2003 Drug Spending Up Despite Pressure to Cut Costs By Ceci Connolly. March 16, 2004; Page A04 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A61435-2004Mar15.html
Contact: Vera Hassner Sharav
CBS NEWS 60 MINUTES
Prescriptions And Profit
March 14, 2004
It may come as no surprise that the pharmaceutical industry is the most profitable business in the country. Americans pay far more for their prescription drugs than citizens of any place on Earth.
It will also come as no surprise that as a political issue, the high price of drugs has united both Republicans and Democrats. More than a million Americans now buy their medications in Canada.
And it’s no longer just older people taking buses across the border. Mayors and governors from Minnesota to Alabama are helping Americans get Canadian drugs by mail.
Such purchases are technically illegal. So far, the government has declined to prosecute individual customers or the cities and states involved. But the FDA – The Food and Drug Administration – has raised the specter of safety.
For more than a year, the FDA Commissioner, Dr. Mark McClellan, has been waging a campaign against Canadian importation. The FDA has also issued a serious warning that using Canadian drugs could be unsafe. Correspondent Morley Safer reports.
How unsafe? How common are the problems for drugs that people are buying in Canada?
“Well, that’s the problem. We don’t know,” says Dr. McClellan. “Because we don’t have the authority to tell where these drugs have come from, or to monitor closely how they’re getting into the United States. And to make sure that the drugs that come in are safe, it could be a widespread problem.”
“That’s a lot of hooey. There is no reason that buying drugs in Canada is any less safe than buying them in the United States,” says Dr. Marcia Angell, who was executive editor of The New England Journal of Medicine for 11 years. She’s currently writing a book on the secrets of the drug industry.
“The people who say you have to worry about the safety of drugs from Canada are imagining the way it was in the old days. That there’s a moat around the United States that drugs that are sold in the United States are made by only American companies. And made in this country,” says Angell.
“It’s not that way anymore. Pfizer, for example, has 60 manufacturing sites in 32 countries. So the drugs are made all over the world. They’re sold all over the world.”
Most of Pfizer’s anti-cholesterol drug Lipitor is made in Ireland. The same Lipitor that’s sold in both U.S. and Canadian pharmacies. Other familiar drugs like Zocor, Nexium, and Prevacid are the same as the ones sold in Canada. They’re much cheaper there because the drug companies must abide by Canadian government price controls.
Do the drug companies still make a profit?
“Oh, sure. Why else would they sell them in Canada? They’re not charities. Of course they make a profit,” says Angell.
The United States is the only industrialized country without some form of control on the prices of drugs. The U.S. also accounts for more than half of the industry’s profits.
In order to keep those profits up, the drug companies have joined the FDA in trying to shut down imports from Canada, and Canadian pharmacies are feeling the pressure. In one pharmacy just over the border, Americans account for 30 percent of its business. They were nervous about having 60 Minutes mention the actual name of the pharmacy.
“We’ve had several letters from the big multi-nationals, certainly threatening to cut off the drug supply very explicitly if you are supplying medications to U.S. patients,” says the pharmacist.
This pharmacy supplies drugs to municipal workers in the city of Springfield, Mass., through a program set up by former Springfield Mayor Michael Albano.
“Major pharmaceutical companies are saying, ‘We’re going to limit our supply.’ What does that tell you? It tells you that they want to keep the artificially high prices in America,” says Albano. “How brazen is that? It just boggles my mind that they can get away with this.”
When Albano was faced with a budget crunch last year, he had to lay off firefighters, police officers, and teachers. By arranging for 3,000 city employees, retirees, and family members to buy Canadian drugs, the city can make substantial savings.
“We can save anywhere from $4 to $9 million on an annual basis if I get everybody enrolled and everybody goes to Canada. And that’s a huge amount of money right now,” says Albano. “If I can save $9 million for my city and put it back, redirect it back into police and fire and to public education, it’ll make a world of difference. So it’s a huge savings.”
Does he do it himself?
“I do it for my family’s use. My son Mikey is diabetic. And we get his insulin and related products for diabetes from Canada,” says Albano, who saves that saves his family $250 a year because there is no co-payment. “And it’ll save the taxpayers who front 76 percent of the payment about $850 a year. So it’s a rather substantial savings for my family and for the taxpayers of Springfield.”
The FDA says importing drugs from Canada or buying drugs from Canada is unsafe. Does Albano agree?
“The American public is not buying that safety issue. The fact is that it is getting insulting for the FDA to say that. I view myself as a responsible father,” says Albano. “And I could tell you that I would not let my son inject insulin into his body three times a day if I thought there was a safety factor here.”
Mayor Albano concedes that casually buying drugs on the Internet could be risky, but says it was quite simple for him to check out his Canadian supplier, and challenges the FDA to do the same thing.
“The FDA has become a pawn of the pharmaceutical industry, that they are protecting those high profit margins. If the FDA wanted to put a plan together similar to what we’re doing in Springfield, that would be good for all Americans, they can do it in 15 minutes, relative to safety,” says Albano.
“We get all our medications from certified, regulated pharmacies in Canada. It’s no different than going to your neighborhood pharmacy. And it’s the exact same medication.”
So why can’t the FDA insure the safety of products from Canadian pharmaceutical exporters – and make sure that it’s as safe as any product leaving an American company?
“Under current law, we don’t have the authority to insure the safety of foreign produced, foreign distributed drugs,” says McClellan.
So what would motivate the FDA, which is not in the business of profiting from drugs, to put out an alarm about Canadian drugs?
“The influence of the pharmaceutical industry on our government is huge. And the FDA is a part of the executive branch of the government. And this is just the propaganda that’s put out to do the drug company’s bidding, to make sure that Americans don’t have access to cheaper drugs,” says Angell.
“Because then they’ll come to know what’s going on. And what’s going on is that these drugs, while they’re made by global companies all over the world, are sold in this country for about double what they’re sold for everywhere else. And that they wanna keep secret.”
“Our interest is in protecting and promoting the health of the public,” says McClellan.
Of course, the whole controversy over Canadian drugs would be moot if Republican Congressman Dan Burton of Indiana had his way. During the recent debate over the Medicare bill, he co-sponsored a provision that would have legalized bringing in Canadian drugs with safeguards.
But Burton says he ran into two brick walls: the drug industry and the U.S. government: “This is a perfect example, in my opinion, of where a special interest, the pharmaceutical industry, has been able to manipulate the Congress and the government of the United States to their benefit, and to the detriment of the American taxpayer and the American people.”
Since 1999, the drug industry has given more than 45 million dollars in political contributions, and it’s spent hundreds of millions more on an army of more than 600 lobbyists to work its will on Capitol Hill.
Congressman Burton says the new Medicare act makes it clear the industry got its money’s worth. He says billions of dollars are in it for drug companies in this new Medicare Prescription Drug Benefit.
“In the new Medicare Act, the federal government is specifically prohibited from negotiating prices with drug companies,” says Safer.
“That is unconscionable. The government of the United States negotiates prices in the Defense Department, in every area of government,” says Burton. “And here we are, going to spend billions and billions and billions and probably trillions of dollars on pharmaceutical products. And we cannot negotiate the prices with the pharmaceutical industry. That’s just not right.”
In December, surrounded by members of Congress, President Bush signed the new Medicare act. Since 1999, these legislators have accepted more than a million and a half dollars in campaign contributions from people working in the pharmaceutical industry. President Bush alone has received more than half a million dollars.
But now, the new Medicare prescription drug benefit is being billed as a big victory for America’s seniors.
“You gotta be kidding me,” says Burton. “Seniors, when they find out what’s in that bill, are gonna be very angry. The problem is, they’re not gonna find out about it until after this next election.”
The plan doesn’t start until 2006. Does Burton think that will reduce the attraction of importing drugs from Canada?
“Oh, I don’t think so,” says Burton. “Because even when you talk about the discount cards and the other things, you’re gonna find that seniors are gonna be paying, in many cases, more than they are paying for Canadian imports right now.”
60 Minutes contacted Bristol-Myers Squibb, Pfizer, Merck, Wyeth, Glaxo SmithKline, and Eli Lilly. None of them would agree to be interviewed. Safer asked Dr. Angell about the case the industry invariably makes to justify drug prices.
“This is a kind of blackmail. What they’re saying is, ‘Don’t mess with us. Let us charge whatever we want for our drugs. Otherwise, you won’t get the miracles,'” says Angell. “And the truth is that they spend less in R&D then they make in profits. And far less then they spend on marketing. And they don’t make that many miracles in the first place . The problem is, is that we’re no longer getting our money’s worth.”
Adds Albano: “The pharmaceutical industry is gouging the American consumer. There’s no other conclusion one can draw. And why should we, in this country, have to pay the highest prices in the world? Why isn’t the president doing something? Why isn’t Congress doing something? Someone has to wage this battle. So we’re prepared to do it here.”
Political pressure is building. Congress now plans to reconsider legislation that would legalize Canadian drugs. As for Dr. Mark McClellan, he is leaving the FDA and becoming President Bush’s new head of Medicare and Medicaid.
C MMIII, CBS Worldwide Inc. All Rights Reserved.
The WASHINGTON POST
2003 Drug Spending Up Despite Pressure to Cut Costs
By Ceci Connolly
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, March 16, 2004; Page A04
Drug spending in Canada and the United States rose 11 percent last year to $230 billion, accounting for nearly half of all worldwide sales, according to data released yesterday by IMS Health, an international consulting firm that specializes in monitoring the pharmaceutical industry.
Globally, the industry came close to breaking the “milestone threshold” of $500 billion in sales, despite increased pressure from patients, politicians and large corporations to constrain drug costs, said Murray Aitken, a senior vice president at IMS. “It bears reflecting that despite efforts to limit growth, the demand for the products continues to be very strong.”
Familiar names continue to dominate the list of bestsellers. Cholesterol-lowering drugs Lipitor and Zocor, antidepressants Zyprexa and Zoloft, and heartburn medications Nexium and Prevacid each had sales in excess of $3 billion. Industry giant Pfizer was the only drug maker to have two medications — Lipitor and Zoloft — on the top 10 list.
For several years in a row, generic drugs have accounted for nearly 5 percent of total pharmaceutical sales.
Few industries can boast the sales trends seen in the pharmaceutical industry. Since the mid-1990s, drug manufacturers have enjoyed average annual sales increases of 10 percent.
Innovative treatments, new customers (primarily overseas), greater utilization and slightly higher prices contributed to another “robust” year, Aitken said. On the other side of the ledger, health care purchasers — from governments to private employers — have tried to rein in drug spending by shifting more of the cost onto patients.
“That is affecting people’s behavior in a number of ways,” Aitken said. “They may be more likely to take a generic alternative or they may decide not to have a prescription filled or they reduce their own doses” by cutting pills in half or skipping some.
At statehouses, in city halls and on Capitol Hill, pharmaceutical companies are facing rising anger over what many American consumers view as greed. Over the objections of the Food and Drug Administration, a few governors and mayors have begun helping constituents purchase medications from Canada, where the price can be 30 percent to 70 percent less than in the United States because of Canadian government price controls. A growing, bipartisan coalition in Congress supports changing the law to make drug importation legal.
The most recent sales figures offered ammunition to both sides.
Peter Morici, a business professor at the University of Maryland, said that with an aging population, prescription medications can serve as “a good alternative” to costly, more intrusive procedures such as surgery.
But Alan Sager, a director of the Health Reform Program at Boston University, said health care spending overall continues to skyrocket, casting doubt on the notion that increased drug spending is reducing other medical costs.
Both academics agreed that Americans pay significantly more than patients in most other countries where governments negotiate lower prices. As Morici put it: “A hard reality is Americans subsidize drug usage around the world.”
Researcher Lucy Shackelford contributed to this report.
FAIR USE NOTICE: This may contain copyrighted (C ) material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available for educational purposes, to advance understanding of human rights, democracy, scientific, moral, ethical, and social justice issues, etc. It is believed that this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 of the US Copyright Law. This material is distributed without profit.