Source: digitaland.gather.com
Showing posts with label Health care fight. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Health care fight. Show all posts
Sunday, April 4, 2010
Health Care Lobbying now a Chronic Condition in Washington
Source: digitaland.gather.com
Sunday, January 17, 2010
Vietnam has asked the WHO for a response to allegations it had exaggerated the swine flu pandemic under pressure from pharmaceutical lobbies.
Pharmaceutical companies have made huge profits from vaccine contracts in the wake of the crisis that critics say was overblown for that purpose.
“At the moment the Vietnam Ministry of Health is consulting various sources and waiting for official opinions from the WHO,” deputy minister Trinh Quan Huan said in an interview with local online newspaper VietNamNet.
In a letter sent to the United Nations agency on Tuesday, the ministry suggested the WHO make recommendations for flu prevention measures in Vietnam and other countries.
The 1.2 million doses of influenza A (H1N1) vaccines committed by the WHO should also be sent to Vietnam soon so the country can conduct trials for safety and efficiency before putting them into use, the ministry said.
Vietnam would continue its immunization plan with WHO-sponsored vaccines, the ministry’s Department of Preventive Health and Environment head Nguyen Huy Nga told the paper.
“Although spread of the flu in Vietnam is slowing down, cold weather could strengthen it again,” Nga warned, adding that even if H1N1 flu didn’t develop into a greater outbreak, the vaccines could be used for common kinds of flu as well.
The number of H1N1 infections in Vietnam had decreased sharply over the past 3-5 weeks with several observation stations reporting no new cases, Huan told Thanh Nien.
The epidemic was weaker than expected with a death rate equal to or lower than that of the common flu – 0.45 percent, he said. Fifty people who tested positive for the H1N1 virus have died in Vietnam since it was first detected here last May.
Vietnam had to reconsider its plan to buy another 500,000 doses this first quarter, drawing on the experiences of some countries which had to transfer the vaccines when local supply outweighed demand, according to Huan.
Vietnam spent nearly VND1 trillion (US$54.1 million) on H1N1 flu control last year.
Confusion
Early this week Wolfgang Wodarg, head of health at the Council of Europe, claimed that pharmaceutical companies had placed their people in the WHO, influencing its decision to declare the disease a global pandemic last June, the UK-owned Daily Mail reported.
Their influence could have led the WHO to soften its definition of a pandemic, which pushed huge profits to drug and vaccines makers, Dr. Wodarg told the newspaper.
“We have had a mild flu - and a false pandemic,” he said, branding the H1N1 outbreak as “one of the greatest medical scandals of the century.”
However, in a press release issued last Friday, the WHO said it had not changed the definition of pandemic in the course of H1N1 outbreak and that it had not exaggerated the pandemic.
“WHO has consistently assessed the impact of the current influenza pandemic as moderate,” the agency said in the statement.
Dr. Jean-Marc Olive, chief representative of the WHO in Vietnam, told a press briefing on Wednesday that a document on the WHO’s website several months ago said a pandemic would include “enormous amounts of cases and deaths,” which may be the root of the confusion.
Yet, the information which “was never part of the formal definition of a pandemic,” was removed later, Olive said.
He said they had to take action and make recommendations at the beginning of the pandemic, whether it was severe or mild.
When asked about the WHO’s investigation into claims that some members of its Strategic Advisory Group of Experts enjoyed financial support or were given a salary from pharmaceutical companies, Olive refused to comment, saying that he was supposed to answer questions related to Vietnam only.
In the meantime, the WHO affirmed in its latest press release that it had systems in place to prevent potential conflicts of interest by experts in its advisory groups in response to Dr. Wodarg’s accusations, which prompted the Council of Europe to launch an investigation.
Any allegations of conflict of interests by WHO experts would be investigated immediately, the agency stressed.
It would review the way the WHO dealt with the outbreak of the H1N1 flu once the pandemic had subsided as well, Reuters quoted WHO spokeswoman Fadela Chaib as saying on Tuesday.
Source:thanhniennews.com/
“At the moment the Vietnam Ministry of Health is consulting various sources and waiting for official opinions from the WHO,” deputy minister Trinh Quan Huan said in an interview with local online newspaper VietNamNet.
In a letter sent to the United Nations agency on Tuesday, the ministry suggested the WHO make recommendations for flu prevention measures in Vietnam and other countries.
The 1.2 million doses of influenza A (H1N1) vaccines committed by the WHO should also be sent to Vietnam soon so the country can conduct trials for safety and efficiency before putting them into use, the ministry said.
Vietnam would continue its immunization plan with WHO-sponsored vaccines, the ministry’s Department of Preventive Health and Environment head Nguyen Huy Nga told the paper.
“Although spread of the flu in Vietnam is slowing down, cold weather could strengthen it again,” Nga warned, adding that even if H1N1 flu didn’t develop into a greater outbreak, the vaccines could be used for common kinds of flu as well.
The number of H1N1 infections in Vietnam had decreased sharply over the past 3-5 weeks with several observation stations reporting no new cases, Huan told Thanh Nien.
The epidemic was weaker than expected with a death rate equal to or lower than that of the common flu – 0.45 percent, he said. Fifty people who tested positive for the H1N1 virus have died in Vietnam since it was first detected here last May.
Vietnam had to reconsider its plan to buy another 500,000 doses this first quarter, drawing on the experiences of some countries which had to transfer the vaccines when local supply outweighed demand, according to Huan.
Vietnam spent nearly VND1 trillion (US$54.1 million) on H1N1 flu control last year.
Confusion
Early this week Wolfgang Wodarg, head of health at the Council of Europe, claimed that pharmaceutical companies had placed their people in the WHO, influencing its decision to declare the disease a global pandemic last June, the UK-owned Daily Mail reported.
Their influence could have led the WHO to soften its definition of a pandemic, which pushed huge profits to drug and vaccines makers, Dr. Wodarg told the newspaper.
“We have had a mild flu - and a false pandemic,” he said, branding the H1N1 outbreak as “one of the greatest medical scandals of the century.”
However, in a press release issued last Friday, the WHO said it had not changed the definition of pandemic in the course of H1N1 outbreak and that it had not exaggerated the pandemic.
“WHO has consistently assessed the impact of the current influenza pandemic as moderate,” the agency said in the statement.
Dr. Jean-Marc Olive, chief representative of the WHO in Vietnam, told a press briefing on Wednesday that a document on the WHO’s website several months ago said a pandemic would include “enormous amounts of cases and deaths,” which may be the root of the confusion.
Yet, the information which “was never part of the formal definition of a pandemic,” was removed later, Olive said.
He said they had to take action and make recommendations at the beginning of the pandemic, whether it was severe or mild.
When asked about the WHO’s investigation into claims that some members of its Strategic Advisory Group of Experts enjoyed financial support or were given a salary from pharmaceutical companies, Olive refused to comment, saying that he was supposed to answer questions related to Vietnam only.
In the meantime, the WHO affirmed in its latest press release that it had systems in place to prevent potential conflicts of interest by experts in its advisory groups in response to Dr. Wodarg’s accusations, which prompted the Council of Europe to launch an investigation.
Any allegations of conflict of interests by WHO experts would be investigated immediately, the agency stressed.
It would review the way the WHO dealt with the outbreak of the H1N1 flu once the pandemic had subsided as well, Reuters quoted WHO spokeswoman Fadela Chaib as saying on Tuesday.
Source:thanhniennews.com/
Drug lobbying group threatens to pull support from health care bill
The lead lobbying arm of the drug industry is threatening to pull its support for health care legislation if Democrats reduce protections for brand-name biologic drugs.
In an e-mail obtained by CNN, Billy Tauzin, the top executive of the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA), told board members that "we could not support the bill" if Democrats reduce the number of years that brand name biologic drugs can keep their patents. Tauzin's e-mail was also a call to action, saying, "please activate immediately all of your contacts."
PhRMA fought hard for language that passed both the House and Senate health care bills, stating that patents for brand name biologic drugs are protected for 12 years before generic companies would be permitted to make less-expensive versions. Biologics are drugs made from living organisms to prevent and treat diseases like arthritis and diabetes.
At issue now: some Democrats who support the generics industry are trying to use negotiations over a final health care bill to shave off a few years from the 12-year brand exclusivity. The leading Democrat pushing for the change is House Energy and Commerce Chairman Henry Waxman, D-California, a defender of generic drugs who lost a battle early on in his own committee to reduce brand-name protection to seven years.
President Obama signaled in a private meeting with House Democrats Thursday that he could support reducing 12-year protection for brand-name biologics.
According to several Democratic sources, Rep. Anna Eshoo, D-California, a lawmaker with biotech companies in her Silicon Valley district, challenged the president in Thursday's meeting and asked him not to change the 12-year biologics protection.
The sources said Obama responded by making clear he disagreed with her, saying, "My job is to do what I think is good policy."
That sounded alarm bells at PhRMA, which represents drug companies in Washington, and at the Biotechnology Industry Organization -- the lobbying arm of biologic brand drugs.
"Fair data protection of at least 12 years for new, innovative biologic medicines is critically important to the future of medical progress in America. Fair data protection allows our companies to make the extensive investment necessary to develop cutting-edge medicines that allow American patients to live longer, healthier and more productive lives," said PhRMA in a statement.
Supporters of so-called biogeneric drugs argue 12 years of exclusivity is excessive and will undermine innovation, and deny consumer access to more affordable drugs.
The Obama administration and Democratic leaders struck a deal early on to get the powerful lobby on their side during this debate. PhRMA spent millions in advertising in support of Democrats efforts and agreed that drug companies would contribute $80 billion to help defray the cost to the government of reforming health care.
Democratic sources said they were considering asking drug companies for $10 billion more as they negotiate a final health care bill.
Source:cnn.com/
In an e-mail obtained by CNN, Billy Tauzin, the top executive of the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA), told board members that "we could not support the bill" if Democrats reduce the number of years that brand name biologic drugs can keep their patents. Tauzin's e-mail was also a call to action, saying, "please activate immediately all of your contacts."
PhRMA fought hard for language that passed both the House and Senate health care bills, stating that patents for brand name biologic drugs are protected for 12 years before generic companies would be permitted to make less-expensive versions. Biologics are drugs made from living organisms to prevent and treat diseases like arthritis and diabetes.
At issue now: some Democrats who support the generics industry are trying to use negotiations over a final health care bill to shave off a few years from the 12-year brand exclusivity. The leading Democrat pushing for the change is House Energy and Commerce Chairman Henry Waxman, D-California, a defender of generic drugs who lost a battle early on in his own committee to reduce brand-name protection to seven years.
President Obama signaled in a private meeting with House Democrats Thursday that he could support reducing 12-year protection for brand-name biologics.
According to several Democratic sources, Rep. Anna Eshoo, D-California, a lawmaker with biotech companies in her Silicon Valley district, challenged the president in Thursday's meeting and asked him not to change the 12-year biologics protection.
The sources said Obama responded by making clear he disagreed with her, saying, "My job is to do what I think is good policy."
That sounded alarm bells at PhRMA, which represents drug companies in Washington, and at the Biotechnology Industry Organization -- the lobbying arm of biologic brand drugs.
"Fair data protection of at least 12 years for new, innovative biologic medicines is critically important to the future of medical progress in America. Fair data protection allows our companies to make the extensive investment necessary to develop cutting-edge medicines that allow American patients to live longer, healthier and more productive lives," said PhRMA in a statement.
Supporters of so-called biogeneric drugs argue 12 years of exclusivity is excessive and will undermine innovation, and deny consumer access to more affordable drugs.
The Obama administration and Democratic leaders struck a deal early on to get the powerful lobby on their side during this debate. PhRMA spent millions in advertising in support of Democrats efforts and agreed that drug companies would contribute $80 billion to help defray the cost to the government of reforming health care.
Democratic sources said they were considering asking drug companies for $10 billion more as they negotiate a final health care bill.
Source:cnn.com/
Thursday, December 17, 2009
Yudhoyono busy lobbying counterparts in climate talks
President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono is actively lobbying a number of world leaders to support Indonesia’s stance on climate change he promoted in the national statement read at the UN Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen on Thursday.
Presidential spokesman Dino Patti Djalal said the President had met with UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon and Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd soon after reading out the statement.
He is scheduled to meet with chairman of the ASEAN and Thai Prime Minister, Abhisit Vejjajiva later in the day as the climate conference is nearing its end.
“The core (of the talks) is to bridge the different interests between developed and developing countries to ensure a new consensus will be produced (at the climate summit),” Dino briefed reporters before the meeting with Abhisit.
On Wednesday night, Yudhoyono met with Norwegian Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg upon arrival in Copenhagen.
Prior to his Copenhagen stop, the President also met with European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso, French President Nicolas Sarkozy and German Chancellor Angela Merkel, during which they agreed to ensure the success of the climate change summit.
Dino added that Yudhoyono had also sent Foreign Minister Marty Natalegawa to lobby Sudan, which chairs the G77 economic group.
“There are high mistrust and big different (interests)… Presently countries are intensively lobbying one another to create a new consensus. And this might lead to a prolonged conference,” Dino said.
Yudhoyono unveiled five points in his statements at the high-level segment of the climate change summit, which was attended by some 110 world leaders.
Among the points are that he urges developed countries to cut their emissions by 40 percent by 2020 and to provide bigger amount of funds to mitigate the climate change.
Source:thejakartapost.com/
Presidential spokesman Dino Patti Djalal said the President had met with UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon and Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd soon after reading out the statement.
He is scheduled to meet with chairman of the ASEAN and Thai Prime Minister, Abhisit Vejjajiva later in the day as the climate conference is nearing its end.
“The core (of the talks) is to bridge the different interests between developed and developing countries to ensure a new consensus will be produced (at the climate summit),” Dino briefed reporters before the meeting with Abhisit.
On Wednesday night, Yudhoyono met with Norwegian Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg upon arrival in Copenhagen.
Prior to his Copenhagen stop, the President also met with European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso, French President Nicolas Sarkozy and German Chancellor Angela Merkel, during which they agreed to ensure the success of the climate change summit.
Dino added that Yudhoyono had also sent Foreign Minister Marty Natalegawa to lobby Sudan, which chairs the G77 economic group.
“There are high mistrust and big different (interests)… Presently countries are intensively lobbying one another to create a new consensus. And this might lead to a prolonged conference,” Dino said.
Yudhoyono unveiled five points in his statements at the high-level segment of the climate change summit, which was attended by some 110 world leaders.
Among the points are that he urges developed countries to cut their emissions by 40 percent by 2020 and to provide bigger amount of funds to mitigate the climate change.
Source:thejakartapost.com/
Sunday, November 29, 2009
Health care fight swells lobbying
WASHINGTON — Companies and groups hiring lobbying firms on health issues nearly doubled this year as special interests rushed to shape the massive revamp of the nation's health care system now in its final stretch before Congress.
About 1,000 organizations have hired lobbyists since January, compared with 505 during the same period in 2008, according to a USA TODAY analysis of congressional records compiled by the nonpartisan CQ MoneyLine.
Overall, health care lobbying has increased, exceeding $422 million during the first ninth months of the year, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, which tracks money in politics. That's more than any other industry and a nearly 10% jump over the same period in 2008. The center's Dave Levinthal said the frenzy of new lobbying activity makes financial sense.
"If lobbying didn't work, people wouldn't do it," he said.
SENATE: Negotiations begin anew
RAMPING UP: Health care groups lobby at record pace
COVERAGE: 'Public option' would cover little of population
SIDE-BY-SIDE: Comparing the House and Senate bills
The vast scope of the health care legislation, which cleared a major hurdle Saturday when the Senate voted 60-39 to begin debating it, has spurred some to lobby for the first time. Gaylord Hospital in Wallingford, Conn., a 137-bed long-term care facility, decided it needed professional help after scrambling last year — aided by state lawmakers — to avoid losing Medicare payments, said Janine Epright, hospital chief financial officer.
"It was an eye-opener," she said of the Medicare fight. "We realized that we didn't have enough pull individually or as an industry to drive the process" in Washington. Epright said the non-profit hospital will spend about $50,000 on lobbying.
Others are beefing up their lobbying presence. Language Line Services, which has spent $90,000 on federal lobbying since 2007, hired a second firm this year as it pushed to boost federal funding for medical translation services. The firm, which employs 8,000 translators, says interpreters can reduce medical errors for patients who don't speak English.
The lobbyists arranged meetings between company executives and House staffers, said Marty Conroy of Language Line. The health bill passed by the House this month requires Medicaid to match up to 75% of translation costs, up from 50%.
The American Beverage Association hired a fifth lobbying firm this year as it worked to kill a proposed federal excise tax on sugary drinks to help pay for the bill. The group spent $7.3 million on lobbying during a three-month period, federal records show. That included $5 million on advertising to fight the tax, spokesman Kevin Keane said.
By comparison, the group spent nearly $668,000 on lobbying last year
So far, the group has been successful in keeping the tax out of the latest House and Senate bills.
But Keane said the group is not easing off its lobbying efforts yet. "You never relax until a piece of legislation, especially one of this magnitude, has reached the president's desk and you are not in it."
Interest groups have a lot at stake in health care debate
The effort by President Obama and the Democrats in Congress to revamp the nation's health care system by expanding coverage to millions of uninsured people and seeking to contain future costs is now in the Senate, but major issues remain unresolved. If it passes, industry groups that have spent more than $422 million this year lobbying on health care will have much at stake in the final negotiations with the House, which passed its version earlier this month. USA TODAY's Richard Wolf takes a look at how each group has fared so far and what's to come.
What they get: New patients would be added because of a mandate in the House and Senate that most people buy insurance. Both bills include billions of dollars in subsidies to help the uninsured. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates 36 million people would be added over the next decade in the House bill; 31 million in the Senate version.
What they give up: Their earnings per patient could decline as more payments are made on the basis of quality, not quantity of services, and as preventive care is stressed. Cost containment efforts in the bills range from pilot projects designed to compare the effectiveness of medical treatments in different regions to creation of a Medicare commission that could force votes in Congress to cut health care spending.
What's next: The American Medical Association wants a 10-year deal that would prevent annual reductions in the fees Medicare pays physicians. It would add at least $210 billion to the deficit over that time, something President Obama has vowed not to do, so it must be passed separately. The Senate voted down its version last month; the House passed its version Thursday.
Hospitals
What they get: Under both bills, hospitals would see 15 million new people on Medicaid, the nation's health care program for the poor and people with disabilities, as well as 18 million to 19 million more who receive tax credits to help pay for insurance. That means the number of uninsured people going to emergency rooms who can't their bills would decline.
What they give up: Three major hospital associations agreed with the White House to forfeit up to $155 billion over 10 years in Medicare reimbursements and other payments. Some of that would come from payments now made to hospitals serving large numbers of uninsured patients. The groups are the American Hospital Association, Catholic Health Association and the Federation of American Hospitals.
What's next: Hospitals won a 10-year exemption in the Senate bill from any additional Medicare reductions that might be recommended by a new advisory board to force cost-cutting action by Congress. The House bill does not include such an advisory board so this issue will issue will be resolved by congressional negotiators.
Source:usatoday.com
About 1,000 organizations have hired lobbyists since January, compared with 505 during the same period in 2008, according to a USA TODAY analysis of congressional records compiled by the nonpartisan CQ MoneyLine.
Overall, health care lobbying has increased, exceeding $422 million during the first ninth months of the year, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, which tracks money in politics. That's more than any other industry and a nearly 10% jump over the same period in 2008. The center's Dave Levinthal said the frenzy of new lobbying activity makes financial sense.
"If lobbying didn't work, people wouldn't do it," he said.
SENATE: Negotiations begin anew
RAMPING UP: Health care groups lobby at record pace
COVERAGE: 'Public option' would cover little of population
SIDE-BY-SIDE: Comparing the House and Senate bills
The vast scope of the health care legislation, which cleared a major hurdle Saturday when the Senate voted 60-39 to begin debating it, has spurred some to lobby for the first time. Gaylord Hospital in Wallingford, Conn., a 137-bed long-term care facility, decided it needed professional help after scrambling last year — aided by state lawmakers — to avoid losing Medicare payments, said Janine Epright, hospital chief financial officer.
"It was an eye-opener," she said of the Medicare fight. "We realized that we didn't have enough pull individually or as an industry to drive the process" in Washington. Epright said the non-profit hospital will spend about $50,000 on lobbying.
Others are beefing up their lobbying presence. Language Line Services, which has spent $90,000 on federal lobbying since 2007, hired a second firm this year as it pushed to boost federal funding for medical translation services. The firm, which employs 8,000 translators, says interpreters can reduce medical errors for patients who don't speak English.
The lobbyists arranged meetings between company executives and House staffers, said Marty Conroy of Language Line. The health bill passed by the House this month requires Medicaid to match up to 75% of translation costs, up from 50%.
The American Beverage Association hired a fifth lobbying firm this year as it worked to kill a proposed federal excise tax on sugary drinks to help pay for the bill. The group spent $7.3 million on lobbying during a three-month period, federal records show. That included $5 million on advertising to fight the tax, spokesman Kevin Keane said.
By comparison, the group spent nearly $668,000 on lobbying last year
So far, the group has been successful in keeping the tax out of the latest House and Senate bills.
But Keane said the group is not easing off its lobbying efforts yet. "You never relax until a piece of legislation, especially one of this magnitude, has reached the president's desk and you are not in it."
Interest groups have a lot at stake in health care debate
The effort by President Obama and the Democrats in Congress to revamp the nation's health care system by expanding coverage to millions of uninsured people and seeking to contain future costs is now in the Senate, but major issues remain unresolved. If it passes, industry groups that have spent more than $422 million this year lobbying on health care will have much at stake in the final negotiations with the House, which passed its version earlier this month. USA TODAY's Richard Wolf takes a look at how each group has fared so far and what's to come.
What they get: New patients would be added because of a mandate in the House and Senate that most people buy insurance. Both bills include billions of dollars in subsidies to help the uninsured. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates 36 million people would be added over the next decade in the House bill; 31 million in the Senate version.
What they give up: Their earnings per patient could decline as more payments are made on the basis of quality, not quantity of services, and as preventive care is stressed. Cost containment efforts in the bills range from pilot projects designed to compare the effectiveness of medical treatments in different regions to creation of a Medicare commission that could force votes in Congress to cut health care spending.
What's next: The American Medical Association wants a 10-year deal that would prevent annual reductions in the fees Medicare pays physicians. It would add at least $210 billion to the deficit over that time, something President Obama has vowed not to do, so it must be passed separately. The Senate voted down its version last month; the House passed its version Thursday.
Hospitals
What they get: Under both bills, hospitals would see 15 million new people on Medicaid, the nation's health care program for the poor and people with disabilities, as well as 18 million to 19 million more who receive tax credits to help pay for insurance. That means the number of uninsured people going to emergency rooms who can't their bills would decline.
What they give up: Three major hospital associations agreed with the White House to forfeit up to $155 billion over 10 years in Medicare reimbursements and other payments. Some of that would come from payments now made to hospitals serving large numbers of uninsured patients. The groups are the American Hospital Association, Catholic Health Association and the Federation of American Hospitals.
What's next: Hospitals won a 10-year exemption in the Senate bill from any additional Medicare reductions that might be recommended by a new advisory board to force cost-cutting action by Congress. The House bill does not include such an advisory board so this issue will issue will be resolved by congressional negotiators.
Source:usatoday.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)