
The cost of prescription medicine has long been a problem in the U.S. According to the International Federation of Health Plans, in 2013 the medicine Celebrex cost between three and nine times here what it did in Canada. Examples like this are numerous. So I checked the Internet for the price of a medication my wife uses. In Canada, it is $40; at my local drug store it’s $160. A more stunning example is a med that costs $43 in Canada versus $300 here in Brunswick.
The Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers Association (PhRMA) disingenuously argues that you can’t count on the quality of medication you order from outside the country. Do they mean to tell us the Canadian government is so slipshod that it approves medications that are dangerous for its citizens?
The FDA has long been empowered to prevent the shipment of drugs into the U.S. from foreign countries. But they chose not to exercise those powers too harshly, especially against people – like Grandma – who bought small amounts of cheaper meds from other countries. Then, with the growth of the Internet, mail order pharmacies sprung up all over the place. Some of these offered cheap medicines from foreign countries. Big PhRMA became alarmed at this growth of opportunities for ordinary people to circumvent the FDA, so they put the heat on Congress to stiffen the FDA’s regulations.
In 2012 Congress passed, and President Obama signed, the Food and Drug Administration Safety and Innovation Act (FDASIA) giving the FDA the power to intercept, and destroy, small prescription drug packages being mailed to U.S. consumers from other countries. Yes, you read that correctly — destroy.
Under this law the FDA has been given broad discretion to identify any prescription that “appears to be adulterated, misbranded, or unapproved,” i.e., almost anything they might want to so classify. If they intercept such a package that is headed your way, you have the “opportunity to appear before FDA and introduce testimony on the admissibility of the drug.” If you are successful in this appeal, you may, upon your return from D.C., take your medication when you eventually receive it.
Senators Collins and Snowe both voted for this bill. Representatives Pingree and Michaud voted for the House version.
Being proximate to Canada, this situation is not lost on Mainers. In 2004, the City of Portland began encouraging its employees to purchase medicine from Canada. Since then, the city estimates that it has saved about $200,000 per year from the cost of medications.
In 2013, the Maine Legislature passed a bill that allows state residents to purchase medicine from Canada, Great Britain, Australia or New Zealand. The bill, LD 171, was passed by overwhelming majorities in both houses. It was estimated that the State Employee Health Plan would save $3 million per year as a result of this law.
A coalition of groups including PhRMA and drug stores promptly sued the state, contending that LD 171 represents unfair foreign competition. But in May Big PhRMA was tossed out of the suit by the U.S. District Court Judge, thereby depriving the plaintiffs of their strongest partner. Your local drug stores, however, are still in the fight against the state.
LD 171 puts Maine at loggerheads with the U.S. FDA. That is fine with me. This is our chance to stand up to the Big Money cancer that is eating away at our nation.
Let’s not kid ourselves. This is not about the drug industry’s tender-hearted concerns for our health. It’s about very Big Money. Period.
———
Kevin Twine lives in Brunswick.
Comments are not available on this story. Read more about why we allow commenting on some stories and not on others.
We believe it's important to offer commenting on certain stories as a benefit to our readers. At its best, our comments sections can be a productive platform for readers to engage with our journalism, offer thoughts on coverage and issues, and drive conversation in a respectful, solutions-based way. It's a form of open discourse that can be useful to our community, public officials, journalists and others.
We do not enable comments on everything — exceptions include most crime stories, and coverage involving personal tragedy or sensitive issues that invite personal attacks instead of thoughtful discussion.
You can read more here about our commenting policy and terms of use. More information is also found on our FAQs.
Show less