![]() |
John Cummins, M.P. Delta-South Richmond |
News Release |
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
February 11, 1998
Hon. Allan Rock, P.C., M.P.
Minister of Health
House of Commons
Ottawa, Ontario
KIA 0A6
Dear Minister:
I was troubled to read in the February 9, 1998 edition of the Defence Policy Review a comment by Hoffmann-La Roche, the manufacturer of mefloquine.
Hoffmann-La Roche claimed that its Lariam Safety Monitoring Study conducted under the requirements of the Food and Drug Act for your department's pre-licensing review of the drug "was not a rigorous study."
The article goes on to say that Hoffmann-La Roche "made clear, from the company's point of view, that they had no problem with the way DND had handled the mefloquine issue." I am concerned that the company has publicly flouted its duty and the duty of its investigation to obey the Food and Drug Act when conducting studies of new drugs.
You will recall that your department made an urgent request of Hoffmann-La Roche on October 20, 1994 for information on how the Safety Monitoring Study had been conducted in regard to the Department of Defence's use of mefloquine.
It would be appreciated if you might review the appropriateness of the published comment by a Hoffmann-La Roche official that the Lariam Safety Monitoring Study "was not a rigorous study" and that in the company's view "that they had no problem with the way DND had handled the mefloquine issue."
Yours truly,
John Cummins, M.P.
February 11, 1998
Mr. Denis Desautels
Auditor General of Canada
240 Sparks Street
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0G6
Dear Auditor General:
I appreciate that you are undertaking an audit of the Health Protection Branch of the Department of Health. I therefore want to bring to your attention a comment by Hoffmann-La Roche, the manufacturer of mefloquine, in the February 9, 1998 edition of the Defence Policy Review.
Hoffmann-La Roche claimed that its Lariam Safety Monitoring Study conducted under the requirements of the Food and Drug Act for the Health Protection Branch's pre-licensing review of the drug "was not a rigorous study."
The article goes on to say that Hoffmann-La Roche "made clear, from the company's point of view, that they had no problem with the way DND had handled the mefloquine issue."
It is obvious that the climate of drug regulation in Canada is so lax that companies publicly flout their duty and the duty of their own investigation to obey the Food and Drug Act when conducting studies of new drugs.
You will recall that the Health Protection Branch made an urgent request of Hoffmann-La Roche on October 20, 1994 for information on how the Safety Monitoring Study had been conducted in regard to the Department of Defence's use of mefloquine.
Your audit of the Health Protection Branch and its handling of the mefloquine issue can help re-establish public confidence in the licensing of new drugs.
Yours sincerely,
John Cummins, M.P.
For more information, please contact:
John Cummins, M.P.
(613) 992-2957