Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2009-01-13-Speech-2-379"
Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
---|---|
rdf:type | |
dcterms:Date | |
dcterms:Is Part Of | |
dcterms:Language | |
lpv:document identification number |
"en.20090113.29.2-379"2
|
lpv:hasSubsequent | |
lpv:speaker | |
lpv:spokenAs | |
lpv:translated text |
"Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, it is good that we are discussing a new piece of pharmaceutical legislation this evening. I would also like to thank Commissioner Verheugen for providing us with this opportunity.
Commissioner Verheugen has rightly raised the fact that a number of amendments to the legislation are necessary. We need a greater focus on safety, better rules concerning information for patients and effective measures against counterfeit medicines. I would also stress the point that the patient must play the central role in this regard.
Medicines are subject to strict supervision, which is why it is not possible to put any old thing on the market. Strict tests are carried out on medicines before they reach the market, but once they are on the market it is extremely rare for them to be tested again. Supervision of a medicine is limited once it reaches the market. Side effects are reported, but there is little research into the effectiveness of medicines. The proposed legislation gives us an opportunity to make very necessary improvements on this front.
For example, cholesterol-lowering medication is taken on a mass scale, although little is known about the effectiveness of various products and very little, indeed, is known about which product is the most effective. The same applies to antidepressants and other drugs which have an impact on people’s mental health. It would be a good idea if the pharmaceutical industry were required to undertake more extensive research into the effectiveness and side effects of its products. Independent testing is necessary in this regard.
We all know that patient information about medicines is a controversial topic. Anyone watching prime-time television in the United States can see what trouble this can cause. ‘Ask your doctor for x medicine for breast cancer or y medicine for cystitis.’ So far, there has been a ban on the advertising of medicines in Europe and, as far as I am concerned, that is how it should remain. We cannot allow anyone to saddle us with a diagnosis or talk us into taking a drug.
The pharmaceutical industry wants to inform patients about its products and thinks that it is the body most capable of doing that. I imagine that that might very well be the case, but independent testing is crucial here, too. The legislative proposal relaxes the rules on the circulation of information via the Internet and printed media. As Commissioner Verheugen himself says, this is a modern and progressive proposal. There must be a very clear dividing line between information and advertising and patients should have the right to reliable information. For this reason, it would be a good idea to collect information in a European database, together with comparative information on the effects and side effects of medicines.
The third proposal in the package tightens the rules intended to prevent counterfeit medicines from being placed on the market. That is only right, because, as my fellow Member Mr Bowis has stressed, placing counterfeit medicines on the market is a serious offence. Commissioner Verheugen is also right in saying that this phenomenon is not so much a consequence of parallel trade as of altogether different mechanisms which we need to tackle. In the upcoming period we should deepen our discussion about the advantages and disadvantages of information for patients, counterfeit medicines and patient safety, because it is certain that we are dealing with a number of public duties here. The industry has a responsibility, patients have a certain amount of responsibility, but so do the authorities as well."@en1
|
lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples