02 November 2005
EDITORIAL: Diluting the ‘evidence’
OTHER than the controversy of the “unidentified doctors” in the current counterfeit drugs inquiry at the sangguniang panlalawigan, what should likewise concern, and more urgently so, our provincial authorities is that case of “undilutable” or non-dissolving vials of antibiotics in government pharmacies purchased out of provincial government funds.
The first time around, and again the Bureau of Food and Drugs figured in it too, it was at the Urdaneta Doctors Hospital where a government lady doctor found that some antibiotics could not be dissolved or diluted when these were about to be administered to a patient. The medicine came from the supplies delivered by a pharmaceutical company contracted by the provincial government thru its procurement unit.
Just recently, a similar discovery was reported by another government hospital in western Pangasinan on yet another drug that was among those delivered by a contractor-pharmaceutical company. We can only hope a more thorough investigation will be conducted as this could not but raise alarm bells about the quality of drugs the provincial government is getting from its contractors. One swallow may not a summer make but two could mean…avian flu is around the corner.
Levity aside, Provincial Administrator Boy Solis and the Urduja House supply officers may just need to take another look at the procurement safeguards for medicines in government hospitals or even check that these are being stocked or stored according to their sensitivity requirements. In that first episode of a “non-diluting” antibiotic in Urdaneta, BFAD investigators had all but absolved the contractor-pharmaceutical company of blame and ascribed the “phenomenon” instead to improper ventilation at the pharmacy counter of the hospital. BFAD had claimed that when it tested the remaining vials in a suitable environment, that is, aboard an airconditioned vehicle, as news reports put it, the product diluted. Ergo, the contractor-drug manufacturer and distributor are blameless.
As quick as it seems to be in putting government doctors under suspicion for dealing with counterfeit drug personalities, BFAD seems most often quite ready to believe the best in “other” pharmaceutical entities and give the later its seal of “good housekeeping.”
Do we see the provincial government that is, the Urduja House, nodding in agreement at the BFAD predisposition?
The first time around, and again the Bureau of Food and Drugs figured in it too, it was at the Urdaneta Doctors Hospital where a government lady doctor found that some antibiotics could not be dissolved or diluted when these were about to be administered to a patient. The medicine came from the supplies delivered by a pharmaceutical company contracted by the provincial government thru its procurement unit.
Just recently, a similar discovery was reported by another government hospital in western Pangasinan on yet another drug that was among those delivered by a contractor-pharmaceutical company. We can only hope a more thorough investigation will be conducted as this could not but raise alarm bells about the quality of drugs the provincial government is getting from its contractors. One swallow may not a summer make but two could mean…avian flu is around the corner.
Levity aside, Provincial Administrator Boy Solis and the Urduja House supply officers may just need to take another look at the procurement safeguards for medicines in government hospitals or even check that these are being stocked or stored according to their sensitivity requirements. In that first episode of a “non-diluting” antibiotic in Urdaneta, BFAD investigators had all but absolved the contractor-pharmaceutical company of blame and ascribed the “phenomenon” instead to improper ventilation at the pharmacy counter of the hospital. BFAD had claimed that when it tested the remaining vials in a suitable environment, that is, aboard an airconditioned vehicle, as news reports put it, the product diluted. Ergo, the contractor-drug manufacturer and distributor are blameless.
As quick as it seems to be in putting government doctors under suspicion for dealing with counterfeit drug personalities, BFAD seems most often quite ready to believe the best in “other” pharmaceutical entities and give the later its seal of “good housekeeping.”
Do we see the provincial government that is, the Urduja House, nodding in agreement at the BFAD predisposition?
