SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: JohnM who wrote (1750)6/4/2003 1:17:27 AM
From: LindyBill  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 793801
 
Canada Fills U.S. Prescriptions Under the Counter
By GARDINER HARRIS - NEW YORK TIMES

This is the kind of issue that the Dems love. How can you be against poverty stricken widows saving on drugs from Canada? The Drug Companies are going to have to solve it by changing their Canadian Marketing.

BOCA RATON, Fla., May 30 ? With just three computers, a fax machine and two paper shredders, a tiny storefront operation next to a Dunkin' Donuts shop here hardly seems a threat to the pharmaceutical industry.

But by helping customers arrange to purchase legal drugs at steep discounts from Canadian pharmacies, compared to the prices at nearby pharmacies, Discount Rx Connection and scores of similar stores around the country are part of a revolution in the American drug market.

Drug company executives say the discount stores, which generally make a small commission for arranging each order and delivery, threaten their ability to invest in medical research, and the companies have begun limiting shipments to their Canadian suppliers. Health regulators say the stores, which often operate without regulatory oversight or even licensed pharmacists, are a danger to public health, and they have begun a crackdown.

Still, even if regulators succeed in closing the stores, the underground importation of drugs is already shifting to a more elusive sales channel: drug parties akin to those for Tupperware.

The parties and the discount stores, which refused to discuss their precise fees, are the latest manifestation of the conflict created by the enormous differences in prescription drug prices around the world. Even as governments in almost every industrialized country mandate steep cuts in drug prices, American consumers are paying among the highest prices in the world, and those prices are increasing annually.

The rising prices have led many Americans, especially elderly consumers on fixed incomes, to reach across international borders for their medicines. Cross-border prescription drug sales have soared to as much as $650 million annually, according to IMS Health, a company that tracks drug sales.

Federal regulators largely looked the other way when consumers first began to obtain prescription drugs from Canadian pharmacies through Web sites. But now that retail outlets are opening in the United States, federal and state health authorities are taking action.

[On Tuesday, Judge Bryan C. Dixon of Oklahoma County District Court in Tulsa granted an injunction requested by the Oklahoma State Board of Pharmacy to close an Rx Depot there but put the closing on hold pending an appeal.]

The F.D.A. is mulling its next move after sending a warning letter on March 21 to an Rx Depot in Lowell, Ark., outlining why the entire industry violates federal law.

"We see a lot of drugs coming in the mail that are counterfeit," said Bill Hubbard, an associate commissioner of the F.D.A. "Patients are gambling with their health."

Neither Canadian health authorities nor the F.D.A. guarantee the safety of drugs imported from Canada.

But Barbara Harbin, the proprietor of Discount Rx Connection here, denies there is any problem with the quality of the medications she helps obtain. A 44-year-old wife, mother and former Catholic-school fund-raiser, she said that she would never do anything to hurt her patients and that she even helped her father order drugs.

She will only close her store, she says, if Congress passes a Medicare drug benefit that will satisfy the enormous demand among the elderly for cheaper prescription drugs.

"If they try to shut us down without putting a drug plan into place, we'll fight it," she said.

Harriet Cohen dropped into Ms. Harbin's store today to check prices after going to a dental appointment nearby. At 72, Mrs. Cohen said she was worried about paying for her diabetes drugs and the many medicines that her husband, Leonard, desperately needs for a failing heart and emphysema.

Mr. Cohen is a prime candidate for the types of drugs brokers by Discount Rx Connection and similar stores. Because it can take up to three weeks for drugs to arrive, most orders through the stores are for pills taken chronically, such as hypertension drugs. (Prescription narcotics are not generally available.)

Mrs. Cohen buys some of her husband's drugs from the Department of Veterans Affairs, some from a pharmacy run by their insurer, Humana Inc. , and some from stores like Discount Rx Connection. Although she has a computer and knows she can order the drugs online herself, she is hesitant to do so. "I just don't trust it," she said. "I like to talk to people face-to-face."

"They started a rumor that there's something wrong with the drugs from Canada, but that's just because they want you to stop taking them," Mrs. Cohen said. But the pharmaceutical industry says it depends on unregulated drug prices to pay for its research into new medicines.

"We believe there would be more innovation if price controls were lifted" abroad, said Jeff Trewhitt, a spokesman for the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, the industry's trade group.

Indeed, as Europe clamped down over the past two decades it lost its lead in pharmaceutical innovation. Even some of the large drug companies still based in Europe, like GlaxoSmithKline and Novartis , are shifting many of their operations to the United States. And the biotechnology industry ? where much of the innovation on drugs is now focused ? is almost entirely American-born.

Several large drug companies are now going so far as to limit shipments to Canada to keep pharmacies there from filling prescriptions from the United States. GlaxoSmithKline said it recently curtailed shipments to Canadian pharmacies exporting to the United States, and AstraZeneca said it was limiting shipments to Canadian customers that were placing orders much larger than usual.

For their part, regulators are concerned about the lack of oversight of the new stores. Pharmacies in the United States must be licensed and employ licensed pharmacists, and most of the new stores do neither.

In addition, the new stores "make the regular guys look bad because seniors go there and think they've been getting ripped off," said Hal Wand, deputy director of the Arizona State Board of Pharmacy.

Jim Detweiler, a pharmacist at Boswell West in Sun City, Ariz. who objects to the new discounters, complained, "If anybody can import from Canada, why can't we?"

Ms. Harbin of Discount Rx Connection says stores like hers do not have licenses because they do not actually sell drugs. Instead, they "facilitate" a transaction between patients and Canadian pharmacies. Mrs. Harbin shreds the copied prescriptions and medical-history forms her customers give her as soon as her Canadian counterpart signals that the forms have been received.

"We are not a pharmacy; we keep no health records here," she said.

Some of the operators of the new stores say they have been stymied in their efforts to obtain regulatory approval. Joel Korsunsky moved from the Canadian province of Manitoba last year to open Prescriptions Drugs Canada in Scottsdale, Ariz., and offered to seek pharmacy licenses and hire licensed pharmacists, he and the pharmacy board said. But the Arizona State Board of Pharmacy told him he could not get licenses because he was selling Canadian drugs, they said.

"It's like they're complaining that we're living in sin and that we ought to get married but they won't marry us," Mr. Korsunsky said.

Many state health officials still do not believe the stores break any state laws. "These things are not pharmacies," said Leo Roberge, director of drug control for the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection. "They are acting as a broker and that doesn't come under our pharmacy law."

Because the new stores are not pharmacies, Mr. Roberge said, they do not need pharmacy licenses, and because they do not have pharmacy licenses, they are not subject to state law.

But Mr. Wand and pharmacy board officials in other states have decided that the Canadian drug stores are indeed acting like unlicensed pharmacies because they collect patient information.

"If a patient walks in with a prescription and hands it in along with their health profile and that store keys it into a computer, that's practicing pharmacy," said Jerry Moore, executive director of the Alabama Board of Pharmacy, who is trying to shut down stores there.

Mr. Hubbard of the F.D.A. said the agency's recent letter to Rx Depot "was meant as a warning to this entire new industry. If they don't stop, both the state and federal government may have to get more active in pursuing them."

Ending drug-sale parties will be much more difficult than closing stores, state regulators say. Ron Ewing, an investigator for the Arkansas State Board of Pharmacy, recently attended one of these parties at a retirement home as part of an ongoing investigation. A representative of a Canadian pharmacy handed out drug-price comparisons along with refreshments, Mr. Ewing said. Anyone wanting to purchase cheaper drugs was asked to fill out a form and provide a copy of a prescription.

"There's a tremendous amount of money to be made by these middlemen," said Charles Campbell, executive director of the Arkansas Board of Pharmacy. "But we want to go on record that this is a threat to the public health."

The warnings do not appear to be intimidating the operators of the new stores. Undaunted by regulators' concerns, Rx Depot's president, Carl Moore, is opening more outlets as fast as he can. "We are absolutely going to survive this," he said.
nytimes.com



To: JohnM who wrote (1750)6/4/2003 1:21:04 AM
From: LindyBill  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 793801
 
In Book, Hillary Clinton Details Pain From Lewinsky Affair
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS - NEW YORK TIMES

Here we go, folks! If you think Hillary didn't figure out from the "Get-go" that Bill was cheating with Monica, and Whitewater was a "PR" mistake, I got that bridge for sale.

WASHINGTON, June 3 (AP) - Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, acknowledging tirades and tears over her husband's affair with Monica Lewinsky, says former President Bill Clinton lied to her about the relationship until the weekend before he admitted the nature of it to a grand jury.

Mrs. Clinton, Democrat of New York, vividly describes her pain over the betrayal in "Living History," her memoir about her eight years in the White House. A copy of the book, which goes on sale Monday, was obtained by The Associated Press.

"The most difficult decisions I have made in my life were to stay married to Bill and to run for the Senate from New York," she wrote.

Mrs. Clinton said that at first she accepted her husband's story that he had befriended Ms. Lewinsky when she asked for job-hunting help, "had talked to her a few times" and that the relationship had been misconstrued. "For me, the Lewinsky imbroglio seemed like just another vicious scandal manufactured by political opponents," she wrote.

More than six months later, with the president preparing to testify before a grand jury, Mrs. Clinton was adamant that he had done nothing wrong and was the victim of a "vast right-wing conspiracy." Then, on Saturday, Aug. 15, 1998, he woke her, paced by the bed and "told me for the first time that the situation was much more serious than he had previously acknowledged."

"He now realized he would have to testify that there had been an inappropriate intimacy," Mrs. Clinton wrote. "He told me that what happened between them had been brief and sporadic."

He was ashamed and knew she would be angry, she recounted.

"I could hardly breathe," she wrote. "Gulping for air, I started crying and yelling at him, `What do you mean? What are you saying? Why did you lie to me?' I was furious and getting more so by the second. He just stood there saying over and over again, `I'm sorry. I'm so sorry. I was trying to protect you and Chelsea.' " Mrs. Clinton said that until that morning she believed that he was being unfairly attacked.

"I was dumbfounded, heartbroken and outraged that I'd believed him at all," she wrote.

She said the president's eyes filled with tears when she told him he would have to confess to their teenage daughter as well.

Mrs. Clinton said she ultimately decided she still loved her husband, although "as a wife, I wanted to wring Bill's neck."

She bitterly described the months of chill between them, never more painful than when they went to Martha's Vineyard for vacation right after his testimony. "Buddy, the dog, came along to keep Bill company. He was the only member of our family who was still willing to."

She said her decision to run for the Senate from New York provided a healing bridge for them. "Bill and I were talking again about matters other than the future of our relationship." she wrote. "Over time we both began to relax."

She concludes that what her husband did was morally wrong but not a betrayal of the public.

On the Whitewater matter, which dogged much of their time in the White House, the former first lady acknowledges only "public relations mistakes in how we handled the growing controversy."

"Whitewater never seemed real because it wasn't," she wrote.

Simon & Schuster, expecting large sales, ordered an extraordinary first printing of one million copies.
nytimes.com



To: JohnM who wrote (1750)6/4/2003 5:10:56 AM
From: LindyBill  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 793801
 
We have talked about the effect of Blogs, John. Here is Hewlett's take on "Who's Who," at the moment.

The Big Four
How a small quartet of blogs is poised to remake the political landscape as the '04 election cycle begins.
by Hugh Hewitt - Weekly Standard
06/04/2003 12:00:00 AM

JOSHUA MICAH MARSHALL is frustrated. He's the young-Blumenthal-in-training of partisan punditry, but in recent days his favorite story line can't get any traction. "It's amazing what it takes to start a feeding frenzy these days," he lamented at talkingpointsmemo.com, his web log, last week.

Marshall has been flogging his Tom Delay-is-Magneto story for what seems to be a year, and it has been largely ignored not just by elite newspapers, but also by the blogosphere. An opinion storm requires certain ingredients to conjure it, and in the world of the blogosphere in 2003, you need one of the Big Four to buy in.

The Big Four are instapundit.com, andrewsullivan.com, Mickey Kaus,http://slate.msn.com/id/2083948/ and The Volokh Conspiracy, volokh.com . These four sites are usually visited by news junkies many times a day because they are staffed by bright people and continually updated, and thus they can guide the chattering class to a breaking story or even a hitherto ignored story. Trent Lott is no longer majority leader in part because these superpowers of the blog filed and fueled the story of his remarks at Strom's birthday bash. The New York Times is reeling because of consistent attention to its inaccuracies and biases by these same sites. Because these sites are so widely read and referred to, they can amplify even small murmurs and overnight can redirect traditional media towards a target.

The power of synchronized blogging is still somewhat incipient. The first generation of bloggers are individualists, and unlikely to coordinate their activities. But if blog alliances do begin to develop among them, the ability to drive the news cycle in a particular direction will be immense.

When the blogosphere ignores a story, that story is marked as boring or insignificant or both. If a story cannot hold the interest of the web's news hounds, it is hardly likely to interest the general reading or viewing public.

If the web seizes on a story, however, it is a huge signal to editors and assignment desks to pay attention. The media dinosaurs can ignore these currents in opinion-making, of course, but not for long.

The first presidential election with full blog participation is opening now. As the Iowa caucuses approach, watch the blogs (1) to see if any Democrat is catching fire there and (2) for leaks of damaging info. Howard Dean is reported to be investing heavily in controlling web-spin, but the blogs cannot be controlled in any meaningful way. The filters that reporters and producers used to provide are gone, destroyed by free agents in cyberspace. The Drudge Report , a sort of Model-T blog, did much to bedevil Clinton. If any of the Big Four reach Drudge-status, it will be as though King Kong, Godzilla, and Mothra all arrived in an Iowa China shop at the same time.

Theodore White began his account of the 1964 presidential campaign this way: "Every man who writes of politics shapes unknowingly in his mind some fanciful metaphor to embrace all the wild, apparently erratic events and personalities in the process he tries to describe."

It is crazy to try and develop a metaphor for the new politics--a politics of a 24/7 news cycle, cable land, talk radio, FreeRepublic.com, and DemocraticUnderground.com , and thousands of blogs-- but the opening scene from "Gangs of New York" comes to mind. Campaigns would be well-advised to designate a team just to keep track of and respond to web-generated stories and opinion, starting with the Big Four.

Hugh Hewitt is the host of The Hugh Hewitt Show, a nationally syndicated radio talkshow, and a contributing writer to The Daily Standard. His new book, In, But Not Of, has just been published by Thomas Nelson.

weeklystandard.com