Slashdot Mirror
Drug Company CEO Blames Drug Industry For Increased Drug Resistance
BarbaraHudson writes Times Live is reporting that while doctors have usually been blamed for bacterial resistance because of over-prescribing, Karl Rotthier, chief executive of the Dutch DSM Sinochem Pharmaceuticals, claims lax procedures at drugs companies are the real cause. "Most antibiotics are now produced in China and India and I do not think it is unjust to say that the environmental conditions have been quite different in these regions. Poor controls mean that antibiotics are leaking out and getting into drinking water. They are in the fish and cattle that we eat, and global travel and exports mean bacteria are traveling. That is making a greater contribution to the growth of antibiotic resistance than over-prescribing", Rothier said. "We cannot have companies discharging untreated waste water into our environment, contributing to illness and, worse, antibacterial resistance. We cannot accept that rivers in India show higher concentrations of active antibiotic than the blood of someone undergoing treatment."
We cannot accept that rivers in India show higher concentrations of active antibiotic than the blood of someone undergoing treatment.
You're looking for quotes? See my journal.
Poor controls mean that antibiotics are leaking out and getting into drinking water. They are in the fish and cattle that we eat, and global travel and exports mean bacteria are traveling.
And those fish, cattle and even people are getting those antibiotics for *free* - seriously impacting our bottom line and tight-fisted control over drugs that, in reality, don't really cost as much as we say they do to research and manufacture, but we sell for a metric fuck-ton of cash.
According to this NY Times article, $2.6 Billion to Develop a Drug? New Estimate Makes Questionable Assumptions are an "estimate that drug companies could have made more money if they used their research investment for things other than drug development."
In both of these announcements, a significant amount of the costs to develop the drugs were opportunity, or time, costs. They are the returns that might be expected, but that investors went without, while a drug was in development. When a drug company invests in research and development, it is tying up money that could otherwise be invested elsewhere. In this announcement, the Tufts Center says that $1.2 billion of the $2.6 billion is time costs.
The end of the article notes:
In 2010, a systematic review of studies that looked at the cost of drug development was published in Health Policy. The review found 13 articles, with estimates ranging from $161 million to $1.8 billion (in 2009 dollars). Obviously, methodology matters.
That's a far cry from $2.6 Billion.
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
So, lemme get this straight.
A drug company CEO is blaming manufacturing companies in third world countries (which the big drug companies use to cut costs) for having shoddy practices. This hand wringing goes so far as "I wish they'd clean up their act." But then stops, of course, because it's not OUR fault - it's those people over in India and China that are to blame.
It's not like we hire them (or, in some cases, employ them as wholly owned subsidiaries), so we're in an excellent position to dictate policy (and ENFORCE policy) for them. Nope. It's all their fault. Nothing to do with us at all.
This is Apple putting the blame on Foxconn for unconscionable conditions in their manufacturing plants. Or western garment companies who contract their manufacturing to Bangladesh shaking their heads at Tazreen.
Shame on those other people in countries we choose to do work in because of lax regulation and cheap unskilled labor for having poor regulation and lacking skilled quality control people! It's all their fault.
A drug company CEO taking this position, but not accepting any blame, disgusts me.
Corporations said they would always act in the best interest because they're held accountable by stockholders and consumers? Is he saying that unregulated corporations are doing things which may be harming the population in general because of a short-term profit motive? Say it isn't so!
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
News flash! Drug company CEO blames the other manufacturers of drugs for problems adversely affecting their supply and demand ratios; stock holders and the media swallow it, hook, line and sinker. CEO is quoted as saying, "But don't worry... that's totally not us. You need to regulate our competitors -- err... ummmm... I mean, those other drug companies, over there... we're totally fine here. These aren't the drugs you're looking for. Move along."
Two thirds of all antibiotics go to perfectly healthy farm animals. Not to cure them of anything, but to make them fatter for market, and make more money for Agrobusiness.
Get rid of that, and you will reduce the evolution and spread of antibiotic resistant bacteria by 2/3.
"We cannot have companies discharging untreated waste water into our environment, contributing to illness and, worse, antibacterial resistance. We cannot accept that rivers in India show higher concentrations of active antibiotic than the blood of someone undergoing treatment."
I'm just happy that Monsanto is not one of these drug companies. They'd probably sue everyone on the planet for drinking water that may contain their product and not paying for the privilege of consuming their pollutants.
It's not like drug-resistant bacteria are going to rise up and kill us all at once some day in a weird, snotty epidemic...
Actually, it may be like that... tuberculosis and pneumonia are quite capable in ravaging through our population if unchecked.
In the years right before the wide availability of antibiotics in the US (1930's), just these two bacterial infections were responsible about 20% of all deaths in the US (not including other bacterial infections). If you've seen someone suffering TB, perhaps it might be considered your weird snotty epidemic...
Also, those mushroom-based antibiotics aren't the ones of last resort. The nasty antibiotics with all the nasty side-effects are the modern ones (that are basically injectable pesticides that doctors often hold back as last resort). If we don't clean up our act we might be going back to something more akin to a pre-anti-biotic Victorian era with people dying of consumption (not some quaint 60's ampicillin pill-poping rehash).
Graphics in linked articles show the effluent of Indian wastewater treatment plants. Few public wastewater facilities can, or were designed to, remove antibiotics from our waste. They are designed for household waste, not industrial waste. Most antibiotics and other drugs pass straight through a typical wastewater plant unharmed. In the USA, Industrial PreTreatment is required for businesses that would otherwise discharge toxic or damaging substances to a public treatment plant. Usually the offending business builds, runs, and pays for pretreatment. Unless, of course, the "good ol' boy" system can unload the cost onto local residents.
America and India have the same problem; India just has more metric tons of it and far less regulation.
FYI: licensed wastewater operator (retired).
I didn't desert Windows; Windows deserted me: BSOD
So is he saying that doctors should keep prescribing antibiotics for illness where they are unnecessary, and that prophylactic application of antibiotics in agriculture should continue? That is, the only thing that needs to be fixed is the manufacturing leakage?
Of course that's the only problem. Because, in India and China, those problems aren't likely to be fixed any time soon (perhaps if ever). If over-prescription isn't the problem, doctors and agricultural users can continue purchasing unnecessarily large quantities of the drugs, guilt free. That's a convenient stance for a drug company CEO to have.
I'm not saying that mishandled wastage at a drug plant isn't an issue. It appears that it is. The CEO said so. But I'd me more interested in seeing facts that back up his claim that overuse is not the issue causing antibacterial resistant bacteria. The overuse is probably more widespread than the factories, and probably more likely to be the cause of the superbugs in your area (unless, of course, your area is near these factories).
Exactly WHO decided to manufacture in China, that would be the big Drug companies as a guess. Exactly WHO should be monitoring their manufacture, that would be the big Drug companies as a guess. Exactly WHO encourages over subscription, a pill for everything, that would be the big Drug companies as a guess.
My guess is something went wrong somewhere and they are starting the smokescreen already to divert attention.
Exactly WHO here is the FDA, since they are the authority that allows those "big Drug companies" to even be in the business of making or selling drugs.
And yes, something went wrong. It's called the Military Prescription Complex, also known as Big Pharma. You want to point to something or someone? How about you point the finger back to the very organization in charge of regulating Big Pharma.
Course it might help if you didn't fill the fucking regulatory board overseeing that with a bunch of ex Big Pharma cronies hell-bent on ensuring profits are prioritized to the point of questioning their dedication to the Hippocratic oath.
Demanding? I couldn't get the doctor to stop prescribing antibiotics for my kid for every minor throat infection. I just wanted to know whether it was serious or not (usually because we were going on vacation or visiting other families with very young babies and some anti-vaxxers.)
I think I threw away four or five prescriptions immediately when we got home. Didn't even check what they were for, the remark 'Take this and come back in two weeks if it persists. Oh, you must use the prescription in its entirety' was enough to know that it wasn't serious and they were prescribing antibiotics anyway.
Eventually we just started going to another doctor, but we haven't had a suspicious cough yet since we changed.
Besides, how many people just throw old pills in the *garbage* ? I'm pretty sure that's the main reason for drug resistance.
It's funny, because this illustrates the bigger problem of people not being aware that when they stop taking antibiotics early, they potentially breed resistant bacteria if their illness relapses. *Noone* should have any antibiotics left to throw the garbage, with the rare exception of someone having an allergic reaction to them.
My one coworker ceased her antibiotics when she felt better, relapsed, and had to get stronger antibiotics. In the meantime, she infected two of her family members with the more resilient bacteria, one of whom had to be hospitalized.