PhRMA Wants US To Use TAFTA/TTIP To Stop EU Releasing Basic Drug Safety Information
from the it's-the-law dept
Back in February, we reported that PhRMA, the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, was pushing to have the EU put on the US's 'Priority Watch List' for its plans to disclose basic safety information about drugs. Now a letter from PhRMA obtained by the German newsapaper Der Tagesspiegel shows that US pharmaceutical companies are trying to use TAFTA/TTIP to undermine the new EU rules on making clinical trial data available (original in German):A letter from the U.S. pharmaceutical association (PhRMA) to the TTIP chief negotiator for the United States, Douglas Bell, states: "The disclosure of confidential data from clinical and pre-clinical study files and patient data puts at risk the health system and the well-being of patients." Why more transparency should harm the health systems, the lobby group doesn't explain, but it makes clear to the negotiator how he should conduct the negotiations with the EU: the publication of commercially-sensitive data from a market authorization, the PhRMA letter said threateningly, is not only contrary to the rules of the American FDA, but also to the internationally-accepted intellectual property rights of the World Trade Organization, the so-called TRIPS Agreement. "PhRMA and its members call on the U.S. government to influence the EU at all levels in order to eliminate this problem."It's hard to see how the problem can be "eliminated." Back in April, the European Parliament adopted the Clinical Trials Regulation by a huge majority. Effective from 2016, it states that information from clinical study files "should not generally be considered commercially confidential" and must be made publicly available -- exactly what PhRMA is lobbying against.
What's worrying is that there's already been one attempt to water down these requirements. Der Tagesspiegel suggests this may have been as a result of pressure from the European Commission, concerned about US reaction to them. It will be interesting to see how the Commission reconciles any US demands during the TAFTA/TTIP negotiations to remove the requirement to publish drug safety information with the new EU regulation that requires it.
Follow me @glynmoody on Twitter or identi.ca, and +glynmoody on Google+
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: drug safety, eu, information, phrma, tafta, ttip
Companies: phrma
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
US response
/s
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahah...(pause to catch breath)...Hahahahahahahahahahahahahah
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Maybe
I would not be surprised if many medications were banned due to lax testing and dangerous results from pharma testing or where only 10 people were used in a test.
this could get very interesting if the EU has a backbone in this situation.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
uh
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: uh
Comparative effectiveness research (CER) was nearly completely missing from the US for a long time.
The American FDA doesn't exactly control shit either. They can hardly even stop doctors from getting fed bullshit about what drugs do what.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Snowpiercer
It seems the train has already left the station and I am on the back of the train.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I hope it will be revealed that the drug industry isn't as bad as we fear, but I don't think that will be the case.
From experience with greedy corporations over the years, I very much think it will be much much worse. Scandals which shows very dangerous hidden side effects that have cost tens or hundreds of thousand of lives combined.
Can this reveal previous studies or just new ones from 2016 and forward?
If not then they just change their tactics, which will cost them a bit of money, but they would get away with what they might have done in the past.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
The real question is if they are willing to push that to get concessions from the commissioner. I would think they can, but it is pretty high stakes since not getting the treaty passed is a fear of all parts in the negotiations...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Hope all you want. They have no concept of good and bad. They exist to make money.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
The openness arguably holds even bigger potential for helping research if EU can get it working. Unfortunately the resistance seems to be strategic/economic in nature. If other companies can allude things from the documents, they will be better equipped to improve and market a competitor. That is not ideal for an industry where the preinvestment is counted in millions or billions of dollars and the economy depends a lot on fighting free market forces.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Perhaps the test results of a substance that is not currently on the market are a trade secret. But for one that is? The consumers have a right to know.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Pharma Consternation's
Which brings up another point. Why is Pharma allowed to advertise to the general public when only a doctor can prescribe? Do doctors really respond when a patient comes in and claims to have XYZ symptoms (a list taken from the advertisement) and they need compound ZYX to cure it? Or do the doctors say, 'Let me run some tests and we will see what the best course of action is' (they can bill more for the tests at least)?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
what negotiations?? all that ever comes from the USA, the only country that is responsible for starting these type of 'negotiations', are demands for everything that aids USA businesses and the country while totally fucking up every other country (that is forced to be part of those 'negotiations' to begin with or being threatened with some sort of action against them and their citizens if refusing!) and the citizens! why no one seems to have the balls to step away right at the beginning, i dont know. are the negotiators bribed so well?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
uMMM
OPEN competition??
RESTRICTED market products??
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Privacy
There is only one reason that any of the relevant/analytical parts of a clinical study would contain confidential information linked to the real identities of subjects: to use "privacy" as an excuse to hide the results from the public.
Any trial involving the actual names of subjects being carelessly tossed about should be declared invalid, and distribution/sale of applicable drug suspended until a real (anonymized) study is completed by the manufacturer. They can try to hide it if they want to, but at least they'll have lost the BS "privacy" excuse.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]