General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsFDA hand-in-hand with big pharma?
My wife went to order her thyroid medicine from the Canadian pharmacy she uses. Canada is the only country who has the desiccated thyroid medicine that works for her and at way less cost.
Anyway...she was told that they no longer accept Visa or MasterCard due to the FDA intimidation of these companies. They still accept American Express but who knows for how long and we don't have that card.
She sent them a check.
Now what's up with the FDA?
Would I be a conspiracy therorist to deduct that they are apparently working to keep customers in the high priced USA market?
longship
(40,416 posts)So-called BigPharma is regulated (unlike BigSupplement) by the FDA. That regulation is determined by congress.
In other words, speak to your congress critter.
zappaman
(20,606 posts)GoneFishin
(5,217 posts)Nevada Blue
(130 posts)It's available on disk from Netflix, but also available (and approved by the Burzynski clinic) here:
The problem is much bigger than keeping customers.
Godhumor
(6,437 posts)Burzynski is one of the very worst medical frauds alive. He bilks terrified innocents of hundreds of thousands of dollars and ends up with only death as a result.
Burzynski should never be brought up in any discussion related to medical concerns.
Nevada Blue
(130 posts)I found the tale and tangle of Elan and the FDA to be insightful (no matter what you may think of Burzynski).
Godhumor
(6,437 posts)It is the fact that he is a menace as are the pet documentarians who made his story.
Except from a very long scientific review of the movie:
The rest of the movie can be dispensed with rather quickly, as its basically one big conspiracy theory, in which the NCI, the Texas Medical Board, the FDA, and, of course, big pharma (as represented by PhRMA all persecute poor, poor Dr. Burzynski because, if you believe the Eric Merola, (1) Burzynski has cured cancer and is a threat to big pharma and its chemotherapy monopoly; (2) Burzynski is a threat to the fees big pharma pays to the FDA to oversee clinical trials; (3) the NCI cant abide the competition. This whole section of the movie is introduced thusly by a narrator with an exceedingly creepy voice, complete with ominous-sounding background music playing.
...
Repeat variations of this sort of passage over and over and over again interspersed with archival footage of various legal proceedings against Burzynski and occasional observations by Drs. Whitaker and Burzynski whining about how they are being persecuted, and youll get an idea of what the last hour of the movie is like. It was painful to sit through because it was so blatant and, quite frankly, not very well producedand there was that annoying robot-like narration describing the proceedings at every point. Particularly vile was the excessive use of the numerous testimonials of crying patients and parents telling various bodies of lawmakers or the Texas Medical Board that theyll die if Dr. Burzynski is convicted or has his license revoked. The paranoid conspiracy aura that surrounds Burzynski The Movie is palpable and becomes quite oppressive by the end of the movie. Pharma, the NCI, the FDA, the Texas Medical Board, and every medical authority are all against Burzynski, and he is the heroic doctor battling against all odds to bring his cure for cancer to all. Yes, its just that nauseatingly blatant. At every point, antineoplastons are presented as nontoxic and effective, when they are neither. In fact, they can be quite toxic.
...
Writer/producer Eric Merola uses Burzynski The Movie as a forum to pound on what he perceives as the shortcomings of the current regulatory system overseeing drugs. If anything, hes right that our drug regulatory system has severe shortcomings, but not for the reasons he thinks. Certainly its not because its trying to shut Burzynski down. Just the opposite. The huge flaw in our drug regulatory system is that, after over 30 years, it has failed to determine once and for all whether or not antineoplastons have any anticancer activity, despite allowing Dr. Burzynski to treat thousands of patients with them while driving the dialogue about whether antineoplastons work or not and portraying himself as a persecuted brave maverick doctor. More disturbing from an ethics standpoint, somehow, Burzynski is still able to enroll patients on clinical trials, despite having failed to show compelling preclinical evidence of efficacy; worse, he charges them huge sums of money for the privilege of being on one of his clinical trials, something that is generally considered highly unethical, to the point of wondering how any Institutional Review Board could possibly approve such studies, particularly given that the FDA has warned Burzynski about how his IRB fails to protect human research subjects. Unfortunately, the Texas Medical Board failed to shut him down in the 1990s. Its apparently gearing up again to try to do so in early 2012. One can only hope that this time its more successful.
In the end, Burzynski The Movie is perhaps the most appropriate vehicle for propagandizing Dr. Burzynski. Like Burzynski, its unsubtle, low rent in the extreme, and lacking in anything resembling scientific evidence. Unfortunately, desperate cancer patients with terminal disease, even ones who would normally be more skeptical, can be blinded to the utter lack of evidence to support antineoplaston therapy because Dr. Burzynski gives them hope. Unfortunately, its a false hope that has a high likelihood of draining their bank accounts to maintain Dr. Burzynskis empire of pseudoscience before they die.
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2011/11/29/burzynski-the-movie-subtle-its-not/
Feel free to read the rest if you want to hear more about how horrible the movie is, primarily from a medical point of view.
Nevada Blue
(130 posts)I'm NOT pimping for Burzynski. My entire point was regarding the FDA and big pharma, which I believe was the point of the OP.
As for the scienceblog article, it's a poorly written movie review (though there are better articles available which discredit Burzynski with better data).
IMO, one can discredit Burzynski and still shake one's head over the actions that took place between Elan, the NIH, and the FDA. If people are interested, they can make up their own minds.
jberryhill
(62,444 posts)A support person at a pharmacy told her it had something to do with the FDA. So, naturally, it is the FDA.
My question is this: Why do people reflexively believe everything they are told by some random person?
What is happening, and it is not just with credit cards, is that a private outfit called LegitScript, which is a handmaiden to the pharma companies, has been strongarming internet domain registrars, hosting companies, and payment processing companies with all sorts of legal threats over unaccredited pharmacies.
Here is the statement from VISA:
http://usa.visa.com/download/merchants/Online-Pharmacy-Guide-for-Acquirers-June-2014.pdf
MasterCard implemented a similar policy at the behest of LegitScript.
It has absolutely nothing to do with the FDA, since the FDA's jurisdiction has nothing to do with how people pay for drugs.
So, in answer to your questions:
1. Now what's up with the FDA?
The answer in this context would be "nothing".
2. Would I be a conspiracy therorist to deduct that they are apparently working to keep customers in the high priced USA market?
I don't know if you would be a "conspiracy theorist", but you would be tremendously misinformed.
At bottom, it would appear that the pharmacy you use does not meet LegitScript's accreditation criteria, which is used by VISA and MasterCard.
blue neen
(12,321 posts)Good info.
Godhumor
(6,437 posts)From batch to batch.
That, in combination with the general illegality of importing drugs from foreign sources would probably be why FDA is shutting down financial access.
On edit: from reading above, looks like FDA is not involved, but I will keep my statement up anyway.
Octafish
(55,745 posts)If it didn't, why would Big Pharma bother hiring all those FDA regulators once they leave "government service"?
Recursion
(56,582 posts)That's why Medicare and the VA don't cover it.