November 28, 2006

Germany Now on Big Pharma Hit List

Earlier this month, Bush administration officials showed up in London to badger the British health authorities into opening its market to the drug industry's predatory pricing policies. (See this earlier post.) Now, the British Medical Journal reports similar goings-on in Germany.

Last week in Cologne a member of an association for people with diabetes and representatives of the drug industry walked out of a hearing of the Institute for Quality and Economic Efficiency in Health Care in Cologne because they were not allowed to record the hearing, which was on the use of short acting insulin analogues. The institute has provoked anger among patients' groups and the drug industry by saying that no evidence has been shown that short acting insulin analogues had any advantage over human insulin.

After the walk-out drug firms accused the institute, which was founded in 2004, of insufficient transparency. The institute's director, Peter Sawicki, said that its rules did not allow participants to record hearings and that this had always been the case.

Tension between the drug industry and the institute has grown since the German government proposed expanding the institute's role, so that it will no longer consider only the clinical effectiveness of new drugs but also their cost effectiveness. The proposal is part of the government's package of reforms currently before parliament.

The institute's evidence based evaluations will become the basis for decisions by the federal joint committee of doctors, health insurance companies, and patients' representatives that decides which treatments will be reimbursed by the state health insurance companies. Under the new reforms this committee will include independent members as well as representatives of doctors and health insurance companies chosen by the health ministry.

"For the analysis of the cost effectiveness of treatments we will use internationally accepted methods, just as we do for looking at the scientific evidence," said Professor Sawicki.

The U.S. has no agency like this one in Germany (or the National Institute for Clinical Effeciveness in Great Britain) that compares drugs for relative efficacy and their relative cost-effectiveness (why take a pricey pill when the generic works just as well?). But calls for creating one are growing. Gail Wilensky, who ran Medicare in the Bush I administration, recently endorsed this reform in the usually conservative journal Health Affairs.

The drug industry is working hard to strangle this baby before it is born. Are efforts to discredit similar efforts abroad part of the campaign?

Posted by gooznews at November 28, 2006 05:37 AM
Comments

Would that we (U.S. citizens) had such an agency to advocate in our behalf. The FDA has obviously ceded all such activity, and instead perform as "insurer" for Big Pharma.

Drug companies do not "compare apples to apples," when seeking new drug approval--only to placebos; consequently, we have so many me-too drugs we no longer recognize the original. An advocate that would compare apples to apples could make a true impact on our healthcare system . . . especially if BOTH efficacy and cost were evaluated. Maybe . . . just maybe . . . we could even get some "real" natural insulins back into this country. Alas, animal insulin is, by definition a "natural" product, hence unpatentable. Is it really any wonder that it has disappeared completely from the American marketplace.

Posted by: Melody at November 28, 2006 04:50 PM

Sorry about 2nd post. Received a solicitation from the American Diabetes Association today; while they do little to seek a cure for this dreadful disease, they are expert at fund-raising. Their holiday pleading noted that DAILY, 4,000 Americans join the ranks of newly-diagnosed diabetics. Repeat: Every day, 4,000 newly-diagnosed diabetics begin the lifelong dependence on BigPharma for continuation of life. An agency that would evaluate BOTH efficacy and cost would certainly impact the skyrocketing costs of medical care--especially diabetes.

http://www.tooprofitabletocure.com

Posted by: Melody at November 28, 2006 04:55 PM

Eli Lilly zyprexa cost me $250.00 a month supply and has up to ten times the risk of causing diabetes and severe weight gain.

Nervous investors watch Eli Lilly shares drop $2.80 post election.

My issue is Zyprexa which is only FDA approved for schizophrenia (.5-1% of pop) and some bipolar (2% pop) and then an even smaller percentage of theses two groups.

So how does Zyprexa get to be the 7th largest drug sale in the world?
Eli Lilly is in deep trouble for using their drug reps to 'encourage' doctors to write zyprexa for non-FDA approved 'off label' uses.

The drug causes increased diabetes risk,and medicare picks up all the expensive fallout.There are now 7 states (and counting) going after Lilly for fraud and restitution.

---

Daniel Haszard

Posted by: Daniel Haszard at December 2, 2006 06:16 PM