THE CASE AGAINST CANADIAN DRUG RE-IMPORTATION

THE CASE AGAINST CANADIAN DRUG
RE-IMPORTATION
by Timothy Rollins, Editor and Publisher

October 21, 2004

Canadian Flag The funny thing in all the hysteria of the campaign this year is that John Kerry, John Edwards and all their liberal idiot friends have been extolling the virtues of re-importing cheaper drugs from Canada (flag, right). Clearly, this is but another scare tactic designed to prey on perhaps one of America's most vulnerable elements of society - the elderly. People who prey on others are justifiably called predators. Yet "Botox Boy" - who wants be America's gigolo-in-chief - fails to realize this is a much deeper issue than just a bunch of hollow rhetoric at a campaign stop before he, Edwards and their wives go off to dine on lobster and shrimp away from the dirty masses they claim to champion.

Living with a disability myself, I live on a limited income - and no - I DO NOT feel sorry for myself in the least, although most liberal Democrats would want me to believe they could make me better from the serious illness and catastrophic injuries that have prevented me from regaining the robust health I once enjoyed. This is not unlike John Kerry seeking to gain mileage from the recent death of actor Christopher Reeve by having the stones to suggest that if he (Kerry) were president, that Reeve would still be alive. Unless Kerry is an M.D. specializing in stem cell research and rehabilitative medicine, Kerry has once again shown us that he's full of crap, but then again, what else is new?

Having lived in Canada, I see both sides of the Canadian drug re-importation issue. Re-importing U.S. drugs from Canada back into the United States must not be allowed for a number of reasons. Allow me to explain. The major drug companies, AstraZeneca, Bayer Corporation, Bristol Myers Squibb, Chiron (in the news lately), GlaxoSmithKline, Johnson & Johnson, Pfizer and the others - both major and minor players - are in the business for two reasons: first, to save lives through life-saving medications; and (2) to make a return to investors. After all, businesses that fail to make money don't stay in business.

I have a couple of doctor friends in Canada. Both have private practices; one spends about 70 percent of his time with his practice and about 30 percent of his professional time working for the other doctor, who divides his time 30/70, with 70 percent of that doctor's time involved in research work. Research and development (R&D) is time-consuming and very expensive, with time trials and development of new medications taking as long as 15-20 years and often costing over 1 billion dollars. This is one of the reasons why the patent - once issued - is good for 20 years before the competition can make a generic version of the drug for themselves and get their own piece of the action. The patent's exclusivity allows them to recover their R&D costs and to invest some of that money into development of new medications while returning some of that money to investors/stockholders.

Drugs are shipped in bulk from the United States to Canada at lower prices pursuant to price controls imposed by the Canadian government. Those price controls are negotiated between the Canadian government and the drug manufacturers, and to sell en masse to U.S. customers is to undermine that agreement, which could backfire in more ways than one with staggering consequences for everyone.

Drug companies could cut back shipments to Canada if this got out of hand; Canada could then retaliate and void the Canadian patent on the drug and have their own chemists break down the drug and make their own generics, thus undermining the ability of the manufacturer to recoup their R&D costs.

Small wonder than that an Investor's Business Daily cover story on October 19th indicated the Canadians are clamping down, fearing possible legitimate shortages for Canadians. No wonder there, given that our senior population alone is one-and-a-half times larger than their total population. The article said, "Last year, Pfizer, GlaxoSmithKline and AstraZeneca said they would not sell to Canadian pharmacies that also sell in the U.S."

The only organizations in the United States permitted to buy pharmaceuticals in bulk from the manufacturers are military - the Department of Defense and the Department of Veterans Affairs. Given their patient load, it's understandable. Most Americans - including retired ones - have a health plan, to include prescription drug coverage, and for the ones who don't, prescription drug coverage becomes part of Medicare in 2006.

Now if only John Kerry could come up with a practical idea, it just might scare all of us… ***

Photo of Timothy Rollins courtesy of staff files
With files from Investor's Business Daily