Landmark legislation designed to alert consumers to where their drugs were made is headed for a full Senate vote, but safety experts say the transparency bill has been stripped of two of its most critical provisions.
asserted
bill → design → provisions
The Clear Labels Act was introduced earlier this year by Sens. Rick Scott, R-Fla., and Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., after lawmakers and drug safety experts called for more transparency in the industry.
asserted
lawmakers → introduce → industry
Last year, a ProPublica investigation revealed that the U.S. kept importing generic drugs from foreign factories after inspectors had identified quality and safety lapses at the sites, including leaks, mold and contaminated water.
asserted
inspectors → reveal → leaks
Medications made at these facilities were linked to thousands of reported adverse reactions in patients.
asserted
Medications → make → patients
The bill aims to allow doctors and patients to see on the label exactly where a medication was made — details that had largely been withheld until now, even from Congress.
asserted
that → aim → Congress
Current generic drug labels often include only the location of the packager or distributor, which can be thousands of miles away from the actual manufacturer.
asserted
which → include → manufacturer
One provision made the law particularly strong, experts said: The label was supposed to include a unique code that the Food and Drug Administration uses to identify factories.
asserted
Administration → make → factories
That code would have made it easier for researchers and the public to track the regulatory histories of specific facilities.
asserted
researchers → make → facilities
The requirements also were supposed to take effect as early as a year after the bill’s passage.
asserted
requirements → suppose → passage
Senators have now struck both of those provisions.
asserted
Senators → strike → provisions
People familiar with the deliberations said lawmakers worried the requirements would raise drug prices and weaken national security by revealing the precise locations where lifesaving medications are made.
asserted
medications → say → locations
The unique identifier requirement has been removed from the bill, and the timeline for companies to come into compliance was extended to five years.
asserted
companies → remove → years
“It’s just a clear watering down of the original bill,” said retired Army Col. Vic Suarez, a former medical supply-chain commander who has been leading a push for more domestic pharmaceutical manufacturing.
asserted
who → ’ → manufacturing
He and others also questioned why drug companies need multiple years to comply.
asserted
companies → question → years
“Five years after it passes might as well be a lifetime,” said Dr. Kevin Schulman, a professor of medicine and health policy at Stanford University who has researched the economic pressures that lead to poor-quality generic drugs.
uncertain
that → pass → drugs
“Why is it that the supply chain, the medical distributors and the retailers don’t want to make sure that they supply the highest-quality product?”
asserted
they → want → product
In a joint press release, Scott and Gillibrand praised the bill’s progress in the Senate, calling it a “massive win for consumer safety and transparency,” but did not address the changes.
asserted
Scott → praise → changes
A representative from Gillibrand’s office said the five-year delay is meant to give the FDA time for rulemaking, which is a complicated, often yearslong process used to introduce new regulations.
asserted
which → say → regulations
The delay would also give manufacturers time to come into compliance and redesign their labels, the representative said.
asserted
representative → give → labels
But Peter Baker, a former FDA inspector whose work involved the very companies impacted by the bill, said that amount of time is unnecessary.
asserted
amount → involve → time
“If they wanted to do it in one year, they could,” Baker said.
uncertain
Baker → want → year
“I would love to hear their justification on why they need five years to develop some rules and guidance on transparency. …
asserted
they → love → transparency
I mean, it’s a simple label change.”
asserted
it → mean → ?
The new version of the legislation also removes the key requirement to include a unique facility identification number on labels, called a DUNS number, which would have allowed the public to more easily trace a generic drug and its active ingredients to the factories where they were made.
asserted
they → remove → factories
In some cases, that identifier could also be used to find FDA inspection reports that describe contamination and other safety breakdowns on factory floors.
uncertain
that → use → floors
ProPublica used that ID number to collect data for Rx Inspector, a first-of-its-kind tool that allows consumers and doctors to look up where more than 40,000 generic drugs are made.
asserted
drugs → use → kind
Pharmacists and patients are already using the tool to learn more about the drugs they take and prescribe.
asserted
they → use → drugs
Under the bill’s updated language, drug labels will only be required to include factory addresses, which can be inconsistent and hard to trace to a manufacturing facility.
asserted
which → update → facility
A single address in India, for example, can house multiple factories, each producing its own drugs, or each with a slight variation on the same address.
asserted
address → house → address
ProPublica reporters ran into this issue when collecting data for the Rx Inspector tool.
asserted
reporters → run → tool
In 69% of prescription drug labels, reporters found a generic drug manufacturer’s DUNS number and were able to directly connect it to a specific facility.
asserted
reporters → find → facility
However, when only a manufacturer’s address was available, linking a drug to a particular facility became much harder, requiring a complicated process of automated address verification, geolocation and extensive manual review.
asserted
linking → link → verification
Experts also worried about certain language in the legislation that could allow manufacturers to avoid identifying where their factories are at all.
uncertain
factories → worry → legislation
Representatives for the bill’s sponsors have said that manufacturers are required to identify the factory where drugs were made, but the legislation only mentions a “place of business.”
asserted
legislation → say → business
Drugmakers could potentially list the address for their headquarters or a subsidiary location in the United States rather than a factory overseas.
uncertain
Drugmakers → list → States
“If, in fact, ‘place of business’ can be interpreted as the location of the importer or the headquarters or something like that, it would be no different than what we have today,” said Ohio State University professor John Gray, who testified before the Senate Special Committee on Aging, led by Scott and Gillibrand.
asserted
who → interpret → Scott
“Then we’ll be right back to where we are,” Gray said.
asserted
Gray → say → ?
“It’ll say ‘Manufactured for So-and-So in New York City,’ but it’s actually made somewhere else around the world.
asserted
it → say → world
People familiar with negotiations over the bill’s language said they are confident that manufacturers won’t have a loophole.
asserted
manufacturers → say → loophole
The changes to the bill were primarily made as a compromise between committee offices and stakeholders, they said, and the FDA will have final say in what counts as an acceptable address.
asserted
what → make → address
…and 17 more, not listed.
The Aporia
