# \[e-drug\] What motivates drug donations? (cont'd) **URL:** \ **Category:** e-drug\ **Created:** [February 25, 2000, 10:07am UTC](https://talk.edrugplus.org/t/e-drug-what-motivates-drug-donations-contd/7430 "2000-02-25T10:07:18Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![mark.raijmakers1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/278dde/32.png) [@mark.raijmakers1](https://talk.edrugplus.org/u/mark.raijmakers1)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2000, 10:07am UTC](https://talk.edrugplus.org/t/e-drug-what-motivates-drug-donations-contd/7430/1 "2000-02-25T10:07:18Z")
E-drug: What motivates drug donations? (cont'd) ------------------------------------------------------------------------- I don't want to go into the details of the discussions on whether US tax rules stimulate inappropriate drug donations or not. Please let me make some remarks in the form of questions that will put things more in perspective? First I'd like to repeat and stress Scott Hillstrom's question, to which I wholeheartedly agree: 1. Will your members [of the PQMD] disclose their drug donation and tax records? E-druggers might remember Scott Hillstrom's message from January (also copied to [http://www.drugdonations.org/eng/eng\_nieuws7.html](http://www.drugdonations.org/eng/eng_nieuws7.html)); he writes: "To his credit, Cong. Dogget is concerned about this issue and may be in a position to obtain reforms in the law that would tend to reduce harmful donations." Also PQMD is working with congressman Dole on this issue. Therefore my question is now to both Hillstrom and Russo: 2. Why are you fighting each other when you both obviously should be collaborating in efforts to integrate the inter-agency guidelines for drug donations in US tax law? And a question to James Russo: 3. Why is it that US industry/PVOs has to 'defend' itself from 'allegations' as you frase it? I want to correct some things that are being read in between the lines in James Russo's message and more or less reflected in his quote: "Last March, WHO staff kindly gave PQMD the opportunity to meet with the interagency group that drafted the 1996 Guidelines. We came to that meeting with specific suggestions, and they were largely accommodated -- whereupon we endorsed the Guidelines." 4. What would have happened if the "specific suggestions"(\*) by PQMD during that meeting were not accommodated? 5. Would PQMD not have endorsed the guidelines? Furthermore James Russo writes in his message: "PQMD helped re-draft the 1999 Guidelines and endorsed them, last April." The fact is, Mr. Russo, that US industry for a very long time before 1999 has obstructed the process of implementation of the guidelines for probably the simple reason that many US donations did not comply with them. I think, seen past experiences with inappropriate donations, the essential drugs community has a right to be very suspicious. I also object that in between the lines of you message you hold PQMD partly responsible for re-drafting the guidelines. The fact is that 155 persons/organisations helped re-drafting the guidelines and 15 organisations are sponsors of the guidelines, under which there is no industry organisation. I am sure James Russo agrees with Scott Hillstrom when Hillstrom writes: " ... that the U.S. pharmaceutical industry makes a crucial contribution to the health care needs of the developing world by the appropriate contributions that it makes". But, please gentlemen, let's put things more in perspective. US industry is producing many drugs that are unaffordable to poorer people in this world. I only have to refer to the HIV/AIDS drugs discussions on this mailing list. Let us be very clear: donations do not solve the problem of access to essential drugs. The donations discussions however mask the real problem of lack of access and gives an unfair realm of 'good practices' to US industry. P.S. James Russo is wrong when he states "Many believe that the people responsible for inappropriate donations have been identified, but in fact surprisingly little has been done to actually pinpoint (and educate) them." He is clearly talking about the US because in Western Europe for some years now there is active campaigning on improving the quality of drug donations. In the US however there is still a long way to go. (\*) These "specific suggestions" were surely directed towards softening guideline number 6 allowing more flexibility with one year expiry. Best greetings, Mark Raijmakers Programme co-ordinator pharmaceuticals Wemos Foundation P.O. Box 1693 1000 BR Amsterdam - The Netherlands Tel.+31-20-4.688.388 / fax 4.686.008 [http://www.wemos.nl](http://www.wemos.nl) Web-site on drug donations in seven languages: [http://www.drugdonations.org](http://www.drugdonations.org) -- Send mail for the `E-Drug' conference to `e-drug@usa.healthnet.org'. Mail administrative requests to `majordomo@usa.healthnet.org'. For additional assistance, send mail to: `owner-e-drug@usa.healthnet.org'.