7 Speak No Secrets: (Non)transparency in Health Canada’s Communications about Pharmaceutical Regulation

Author(s):  
Joel Lexchin
2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vishal Ahuja ◽  
John R. Birge ◽  
Chad Syverson ◽  
Elbert S. Huang ◽  
Min-Woong Sohn

2018 ◽  
Vol 44 (4) ◽  
pp. 253-262 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julie Parle ◽  
Rebecca Hodes ◽  
Thembisa Waetjen

This article provides a history of three pharmaceuticals in the making of modern South Africa. Borrowing and adapting Arthur Daemmrich’s term ‘pharmacopolitics’, we examine how forms of pharmaceutical governance became integral to the creation and institutional practices of this state. Through case studies of three medicaments: opium (late 19th to early 20th century), thalidomide (late 1950s to early 1960s) and contraception (1970s to 2010s), we explore the intertwining of pharmaceutical regulation, provision and consumption. Our focus is on the modernist imperative towards the rationalisation of pharmaceutical oversight, as an extension of the state’s bureaucratic and ideological objectives, and, importantly, as its obligation. We also explore adaptive and illicit uses of medicines, both by purveyors of pharmaceuticals, and among consumers. The historical sweep of our study allows for an analysis of continuities and changes in pharmaceutical governance. The focus on South Africa highlights how the concept of pharmacopolitics can usefully be extended to transnational—as well as local—medical histories. Through the diversity of our sources, and the breadth of their chronology, we aim to historicise modern pharmaceutical practices in South Africa, from the late colonial era to the Post-Apartheid present.


2021 ◽  
pp. 29-51
Author(s):  
Jessica Pourraz ◽  
Claudie Haxaire ◽  
Daniel Kojo Arhinful

1992 ◽  
Vol 1 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 21-27 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sheila R. Shulman

Author(s):  
David Vogel

This chapter analyzes European and American policies toward a range of consumer safety risks; including drugs, children's products, and cosmetics. It shows how European and American risk regulations have converged, though the dynamics through which this occurred differed substantially. Pharmaceutical regulation constitutes the most important exception to the broader pattern of increased transatlantic regulatory policy divergence. What makes this area of regulatory policy distinctive is that its political salience increased in the United States but not in Europe. Pharmaceutical regulation also represents an important exception to the dominant pattern of transatlantic regulatory policy diffusion. In this case, European regulatory policies did affect those of the United States, first by highlighting the transatlantic drug lag, and more recently by American decisions to adopt some European practices to expedite drug approvals.


2013 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 534-538
Author(s):  
Marco Rizzi

A significant reform is currently under the scrutiny of EU institutions in the field of pharmaceutical risk regulation. With its proposal dated July 17th 2012, the Commission seeks to modernise the legal framework of clinical trials by addressing a series of shortcomings ascribed to the current regime governed by Directive 2001/20/EC (to be repealed by the new legislation). The iter of the reform is proving to be complex and lengthy, the first vote having been delayed to March 2014.While a comprehensive account of such a detailed proposal would defeat the scope of this short report, the analysis will focus on some of the most salient features of the proposed regulation, and attempt to situate them in the international context of pharmaceutical regulation.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document