E-DRUG: Drug donations - discussion
--------------------------------------
To provoke more discussion on the item on inappropriate drug
donations I would like to quote some of the most recent
contributions to this mailing list and comment to these
Tim Dodd (Aug. 18) wrote:
If the driving force behind some of the less-useful or less appropriate
drug donations is the tax break, how do we lobby to change the rules
for application of the tax laws?
The question is correct. The answer might be more simple and
easy, I phrase it in the form of a question: Why the US
government doesn't adhere to or even implement the inter-agency
guidelines for drug donations?
Jim Russo (August 19) wrote:
Under the IRS rules, the donated product must have a
value in the marketplace. Thus, a drug with, say, six
months remaining before expiration, has ZERO market value [...]
The question is here: who is deciding if drugs with six months
remaining before expiration have zero market value? Is the IRS
going to look at the labels of the donated drugs, determine,
let's say, a shelf life of 5,5 months and say no, ... no tax
reduction to the company? Is this the practice? Any US e-drugger
to give details on IRS working methods? Does the US government
check donated drugs on shelf life !?!
Foppe van Mil (August 19) wrote:
I wonder however, why countries do not flatly refuse
donations which are not up to any standard?
This is a question that was also important at the expert seminar
on appropriate drug donations in the Netherlands (June 11 and
12). What is eminent here is that "a gift horse is not easily
looked into the mouth". Many recipients are not in a situation to
easily refuse bad donations because of fear they might miss good
donations in the future. So, to have some good drugs you have to
accept bad ones! The next quote is adding to this argument.
Phillip Passmore (August 19) wrote:
One reason why these developing countries don't refuse
the 'donations' is often political. On a number of occasions
a lot of press coverage is given to the arrival of drug
donations and the recipient country is obliged to be seen
as grateful for the drugs. High profile people often use
the press coverage to give the indication they are
involved in 'doing something' about drug shortages etc.
Ending this discussion I would like to quote one of the seminar
presentations (seminar as quoted above), coming from the
recipient side:
are hoping that in future, customs will not clear anything
unless the government has approved it. But until then, there is still a
fear that donations will stop if the recipients complain.
Therein lies the dilemma.
"When confronted with scarcity, every alternative is justified
if it means saving lives. This is our dilemma. We want good drug
donations, but we are afraid these donations will stop. It is a real
fear, the challenge now is to make an effort to improve donations
without hindering people from donating."
Anyone to follow-up on the discussion?
Greetings,
Mark Raijmakers
Coordinator programme on pharmaceuticals
--