A Good Example of Why Politics and Science MUST NEVER Be Mixed
.gif)
Last week, the US House of Representatives voted to cut FDA funding by $220 million. The House vote was not surprising given the prevailing attitude among many pharmaceutical and biotechnology company executives that FDA approval of new drugs and devices has become increasingly difficult. While there is no question that the current approval process for new drugs and devices has become more rigorous as compared with the incredibly lax process (and in some cases, the almost non-existent process) used during the Bush Administration, the FDA is simply fulfilling the mandate for the agency when it was created in 1938. That is: to provide the American public with SAFE and efficacious drugs to treat unmet medical need.
Until recently, the FDA had been chronically under funded. And, because of this, the American public was forced to suffer through the Vioxx scandal, the heparin scare and the appearance on the market of many unapproved medical devices. These and other events that occurred over the past decade beg the question: “Should the American public’s safety be placed in jeopardy again simply because the Republican-controlled House is looking for ways to cut deficit spending?”
Unfortunately, the activity of anti-FDA lobbyists (funded mainly by US pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies) has been ramped up ever since the Democrats lost control of the House. And, since most Republicans believe that any government regulation whatsoever is too much regulation, it is easy to understand the House would vote to cut FDA funding. Nevertheless, insufficient funding will not allow the agency to hire the number of inspectors required to insure that drug manufacturing is conducted according to FDA-mandated regulatory guidelines. These activities are essential to insure the safety of the prescription drugs and medical devices sold on the US market.
According to FDA Current Good Manufacturing Practice (CGMP) guidelines, drug manufacturing plants for all approved drugs and devices are to be inspected every two years. Inspections are required for all manufacturing plants in the US as well as FDA-approved manufacturing facilities overseas. Because of ongoing shortages of FDA inspectors (and the emergence of numerous overseas manufacturing facilities), these inspections are typically conducted every three to five years rather than every two years! Clearly, this is not in the best safety interests of the American public.
A report published by the General Accounting Organization about the heparin scare of three years ago nicely sums up the issues.
“In its response to the heparin crisis, FDA took several actions related to its responsibility to protect the public health by ensuring the safety and security of the nation’s drug and medical device supplies. FDA increased its activities related to oversight of heparin firms by conducting inspections and investigations and monitoring heparin imports, and worked with drug and device manufacturers to recall contaminated products while ensuring that an adequate supply of uncontaminated heparin was available. With the help of external entities, FDA identified the unknown contaminant and developed tests to screen all heparin products. Additionally, the agency reached out to its international regulatory partners during the crisis. However, FDA faced some limitations in its efforts to inspect heparin firms in China and collaborate internationally, and the agency was unable to determine the original source of contamination.”
Interestingly, as today reported by the EyeonFDA blog, the U.S. House of Representatives Energy and Commerce Committee announced today that it was re-opening examination of the heparin contamination issue. A letter was sent by the Chair of the Committee, Rep. Fred Upton (R-MI) as well as other members to FDA Commissioner Margaret Hamburg requesting that the agency supply all documents in connection with the heparin investigation from January 1, 2008 until present. In its announcement, the Committee stated:
“It has been almost three years since the FDA linked deaths and serious allergic-type reactions of patients in the United States to supplies of heparin that came from the People’s Republic of China which was adulterated with overly sulfated chondroitin sulfate (OSCS). FDA officials believe this was an instance of economically motivated adulteration,” the members wrote. “However, neither the Chinese government nor the FDA has identified those responsible for the contamination or described how the heparin actually came to be contaminated.”
Mark Senak, author of EyeonFDA blog aptly noted:
"It is certainly important in that any public health crisis involving the contamination of food or drugs be thoroughly investigated. But the investigating body can’t have it both ways. You can’t criticize an agency for not conducting inspections that are not funded by the same members of the same investigative body."
Is this any way to run a country?
Until next time...
Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!!!
Everybody who works for a living has to learn how to deal with annoying co-workers who, either directly or indirectly, may have an effect on your career trajectory. However, we are living in uncertain financial times, when having a job--no matter the circumstances--is more important than personal happiness on a day-to-day basis. Nevertheless, office politics are a reality regardless of how good or bad the economy is. To that end, managing difficult co-workers is essential if you want to learn how to adroitly deal with workplace politics sand advance your own career. 
ost cases, everybody in the office, laboratory etc knows who these people are but are ill-equipped to effectively minimize the damage that they may cause. I highly recommend
The mere mention of office politics makes me want to cringe. This is probably because I have never been politically motivated nor have I ever taken advantage of a co-worker to advance my career. Those who know me will tell you that I am a tell-it-like-it is kind of guy. And, I simply refuse to play the game to get ahead. That is probably why I am blogger/science writer and not a vice president or CEO of some company. Nevertheless, for those of you who are ambitious and driven, you will need to learn to successfully manage workplace politics because--you don't--you may wind up like me (not that there is anything wrong with that)..jpg)
directly or indirectly, may have an effect on your career trajectory. Managing difficult co-workers is essential if you want to learn how to adroitly deal with workplace politics. I came across a 