apple0154
MEOW
The latest news is: (Excerpt) Injectable drugs used in hospitals are those most in short supply……. The affected drugs include vital medications such as chemotherapy, antibiotics, analgesics (painkillers), anesthetics and more. Such shortages can compromise therapy or delay treatment, putting patients at risk -- sometimes even of death…..
Respondents were most alarmed by the use of less desirable, unfamiliar and often more expensive alternative drugs. They were concerned of potential for errors, poor patient outcomes or preventable adverse drug events. For example, using a substitute of an unavailable drug resulted in an overdosing error that led to the death of a 16-year-old boy in an emergency room, ISMP President Michael Cohen wrote in July….
"a multitude of drugs" have recently become unavailable, adding, "some of them, unfortunately, are key drugs used for multiple different cancers in adults and children, and are key players in management….
But when it comes to a company's business decisions, the FDA has no authority. Some companies have decided it's not worth their trouble to produce a certain drug anymore. Such was the case when Teva decided to discontinue the widely used anesthetic propofol. Basically, Teva said it's too hard to make and barely profitable….
"Right now we just don't have any authority at all to require companies to increase production or to require other firms to come on the market," Jensen says. FDA also can't require firms to continue making a product, and drugmakers aren't required to report shortages or discontinuations, except for sole manufacturers in certain circumstances. (End) (Emphasis added)
http://www.dailyfinance.com/story/d.../19783927/?ncid=webmail&icid=sphere_copyright
So, a company decides to halt production of a life-saving drug and the government can not do anything about it. I suppose it would be communistic to force a company to produce a drug so my suggestion is for the government to send the following letter to the relevant drug company.
The letter should be in a formal format, proper heading, etc. then continued as follows:
To the A**hole concerned,
Please be advised that should you or other 'holes responsible for the manufacture of the drug do not manufacture and make available for immediate distribution the drug in question within 72 hours of receiving this notice the patent will be posted on the web and freely available for all.
This is done under the authority and responsibility of the government as stated in the Preamble to the Constitution. Regarding the Preamble, "It states in general terms, and courts have referred to it as reliable evidence of, the Founding Fathers' intentions regarding the Constitution's meaning and what they hoped the Constitution would achieve" and specifically concerning the part, "to promote the general Welfare".
Should you feel the government is obliged to sit back and watch citizens die due to a drug being "too hard to make and barely profitable" we look forward to seeing your a** in court.
Sincerely, without prejudice,
Your President, B. Obama
I think that would solve the problem.
Respondents were most alarmed by the use of less desirable, unfamiliar and often more expensive alternative drugs. They were concerned of potential for errors, poor patient outcomes or preventable adverse drug events. For example, using a substitute of an unavailable drug resulted in an overdosing error that led to the death of a 16-year-old boy in an emergency room, ISMP President Michael Cohen wrote in July….
"a multitude of drugs" have recently become unavailable, adding, "some of them, unfortunately, are key drugs used for multiple different cancers in adults and children, and are key players in management….
But when it comes to a company's business decisions, the FDA has no authority. Some companies have decided it's not worth their trouble to produce a certain drug anymore. Such was the case when Teva decided to discontinue the widely used anesthetic propofol. Basically, Teva said it's too hard to make and barely profitable….
"Right now we just don't have any authority at all to require companies to increase production or to require other firms to come on the market," Jensen says. FDA also can't require firms to continue making a product, and drugmakers aren't required to report shortages or discontinuations, except for sole manufacturers in certain circumstances. (End) (Emphasis added)
http://www.dailyfinance.com/story/d.../19783927/?ncid=webmail&icid=sphere_copyright
So, a company decides to halt production of a life-saving drug and the government can not do anything about it. I suppose it would be communistic to force a company to produce a drug so my suggestion is for the government to send the following letter to the relevant drug company.
The letter should be in a formal format, proper heading, etc. then continued as follows:
To the A**hole concerned,
Please be advised that should you or other 'holes responsible for the manufacture of the drug do not manufacture and make available for immediate distribution the drug in question within 72 hours of receiving this notice the patent will be posted on the web and freely available for all.
This is done under the authority and responsibility of the government as stated in the Preamble to the Constitution. Regarding the Preamble, "It states in general terms, and courts have referred to it as reliable evidence of, the Founding Fathers' intentions regarding the Constitution's meaning and what they hoped the Constitution would achieve" and specifically concerning the part, "to promote the general Welfare".
Should you feel the government is obliged to sit back and watch citizens die due to a drug being "too hard to make and barely profitable" we look forward to seeing your a** in court.
Sincerely, without prejudice,
Your President, B. Obama
I think that would solve the problem.
