Bill seeks to remove 'wall of secrecy' over safety of drugs
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.PATIENTS and doctors would, for the first time, have the right to know how safe and effective medicines are under a Private Member's Bill launched yesterday.
Giles Radice, Labour MP for Durham North, who is sponsoring the Medicines Information Bill, said it was designed to end the 'unacceptable secrecy' which surrounded medicines in Britain.
A clause in the Medicines Act 1968 makes it a criminal offence for officials to disclose information about the safety of medicines which is given to the licensing authorities by pharmaceutical manufacturers.
It also prevents the Medicines Control Agency from saying why it has licensed a particular drug, or why it has withdrawn a licence. For example, Halcion (triazolam), a sleeping pill used by thousands of people, was withdrawn in October last year. Details on the reasons for withdrawal were largely supplied by leaked documents, and information from the United States Food and Drug Administration.
More than 100 medicines have had their licences withdrawn or suspended since 1979. Ministers are not even allowed to release information about imported counterfeit medicines.
The clause also prevents the release of information about veterinary medicines used to treat animals bred for human consumption. Drug residues may accumulate in the animal carcases. Mr Radice said: 'Everybody, including MPs, finds themselves up against a wall of secrecy in their attempts to get information. Yet all potent drugs have side-effects.
'Consumers must have the right to know what the risks are, so they can balance the risk against the benefit . . . the United Kingdom's licensing system for medicines and veterinary treatments is widely regarded as one of the most stringent in the world - so why not allow public scrutiny of the basis of their decisions?'
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments