Drug Companies Oppose Medicine 'take-back' Proposal
From Sun Journal (Lewiston, ME) (January 26, 2010)
Jan. 26--AUGUSTA -- Though a panel of Maine lawmakers approved a
proposal last week that would create a permanent
collection-and-disposal program for prescription and
nonprescription drugs, pharmaceutical companies are hoping to
defeat the measure when it is taken up by the full
Legislature.
The bill would require pharmaceutical manufacturers to create their
own program for customers to return their unused medications so
that they can be treated as hazardous waste, rather than flushed
down the toilet or taken out with the household trash, the current
recommended means of disposal.
Recently, the Maine Department of Environmental Protection
conducted tests on three different landfills and confirmed the
presence of drugs including antidepressants, antibiotics, steroids,
as well as heart-, asthma- and pain-medications in liquid draining
from the landfills.
Supporters say the legislation would have health and environmental
benefits, and establish shared responsibility among consumers,
government agencies, health care entities, pharmacies and
manufacturers. But opponents in the pharmaceutical industry say the
costs of creating such a program would have to get passed on to
people purchasing drugs.
State Rep. Anne Perry, D-Calais, who sponsored the bill, said it
has been changed from the original proposal to minimize
opposition.
"The responsibility for the manufacturers will be to create a
statewide program and that would be approved and work within the
federal laws. But there's a lot left open for flexibility in
different regions; there would only be reports every six months of
the weight of what's taken in," she said. "It's essential for
getting pharmaceuticals out of our households and out of the waste
stream."
Perry, who has worked to reduce the amount of unused
pharmaceuticals in households and the environment since 2003, said
there are a number of similar regional programs in other states,
but this would be the first statewide initiative.
In 2008, Maine developed a pilot mail-in program using grant
funding from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and matching
funds from the state.
"The mail-back program has everything sent to the (Maine Drug
Enforcement Agency) because of a federal rule around controlled
substances. That is the issue really with this (new proposal) and
what we have done in the mail-back program. Law enforcement does
need to be present when controlled substances may be involved,"
Perry said.
The Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, which
represents pharmaceutical research and biotechnology companies,
opposes the proposal because of the costs it imposes on
manufacturers to develop disposal programs and pay for their
implementation.
A PhRMA spokeswoman confirmed on Monday that the group partnered
with other groups to advertise against the bill in local
newspapers. The advertisements urged readers to contact their
legislators to oppose the measure.
"Creating a new program that could increase the cost of
distributing medicines, that cannot be fully implemented under
federal law, and that fails to include any provisions that help the
environment would be wasteful of time and resources," said Ken
Johnson, a senior vice president with PhRMA, in a recent release.
He also said that 90 percent of trace pharmaceuticals found in
water is from the excretion of medicines from patients, not thrown
away medication leaching from landfills.
"There's been exponential growth in the amount of medications that
are available now, both prescription and over the counter; in 2008,
there were about 2.8 million prescriptions for controlled drugs
issued in Maine," said Perry, the House chairman of the Health and
Human Services Committee. "Ten percent of an enormous number is an
enormous number."
House Speaker Hannah Pingree, D-North Haven, also a co-sponsor on
the bill, said Maine has passed similar laws concerning e-waste or
computer disposal, and mercury, following "a very similar
argument."
"The producer does not want to pay for the disposal of their
product and the eventual costs end up falling on the state or
people's health," she said. "Maine has fought big pharma for a
long, long time and been successful, and PhRMA is rarely happy with
what we do. I don't think legislators that support this will have
their minds changed."
State Rep. Matt Peterson, D-Rumford, supported the bill during the
Health and Human Services Committee vote last week, but said he is
still weighing the costs involved in the measure. Members voted 8-4
to pass the legislation, which is not expected to cost the state
money.
"It seems it's always a cost-benefit question. I am looking for
answers that will help quantify the impacts, both environmental and
economic," he said in an e-mail on Monday. "I supported the bill in
committee knowing we would have a divided report and there would be
another chance for an even more complete debate on the House
floor."
The bill will be scheduled for votes in the House and Senate in the
coming weeks.
rmetzler@sunjournal.com
To see more of the Sun Journal or to subscribe to the newspaper, go
to http://www.sunjournal.com.
Copyright (c) 2010, Sun Journal, Lewiston, Maine
Distributed by McClatchy-Tribune Information Services.
For reprints, email tmsreprints@permissionsgroup.com, call
800-374-7985 or 847-635-6550, send a fax to 847-635-6968, or write
to The Permissions Group Inc., 1247 Milwaukee Ave., Suite 303,
Glenview, IL 60025, USA.
Posted: January 2010
