NOAH calls for tighter controls on use of human medicines
by vets
The draft Veterinary Medicines Regulation provides an
ideal opportunity to ensure all animals benefit from fully authorised animal
medicines, says the National Office of Animal Health. And the association
believes the Veterinary
Medicines Directorate are sympathetic to this view.
NOAH has, at a consultation meeting with the
VMD, suggested changes
to the proposed regulation that would curtail the supply and advertising by
wholesalers of medicines for use in animals (which happen to have an
authorisation for use in humans) – unless, of course, there is no suitable
alternative. An alternative solution would be that the only person able to
dispense a human medicine would be a pharmacist – as long as the vet does
not need to administer the medicine himself. NOAH has proposed this option
in its formal submission to the
VMD.
“We need to be clear we are not talking about generic
animal medicines”, says NOAH chief executive Phil Sketchley. “The veterinary
medicines industry has no concerns about the use of licensed veterinary
generic medicines – those which have a full veterinary Marketing
Authorisation, after undergoing full bio-equivalence within the proper
regulatory process, as controlled by the
VMD.
“Our real concern is the use of human medicines, whether
they are generic or not, to treat animals when those medicines have not been
evaluated for safety, efficacy and quality in the target animal species.
There are some situations where a human medicine is the only option for a
vet to use to treat an animal – cytotoxic medicines for cancer treatment
spring to mind – and of course we would not wish to see the veterinary
surgeon’s ability to treat using these medicines hampered in any way.
It is when there is a licensed animal medicine available,
and a vet chooses to use a human alternative instead, that we feel the
animal and its owner may not be getting the best deal.”
“Some vets may claim that human generics are cheaper –
but apart from the fact that this isn’t always the case, they are laying
themselves wide open to claims from unhappy owners,” Mr Sketchley points
out. “In particular, tablets which have been developed for the human
digestive system have a density – and often a sugar coating – which have not
been tested for safety or efficacy in dogs or cats. There are many
documented instances where a human antibiotic designed to travel through the
26 feet or so of the human gut has gone through the canine intestinal tract
and emerged unscathed without having made any contribution at all to the
medication of the patient.
“Therefore animals do not always get a medicine properly
developed to treat them, and their health and welfare, as well as speed of
recovery from infection or whatever condition is being treated, may be
impaired or compromised. Vets are also leaving themselves open to legal
challenge. We are urging the
VMD to help stamp out
this illegal use,” he adds.
Ends
20 April 2005
Notes for Editors
1. For further information contact Phil Sketchley or
Alison Glennon at NOAH on 020 8367 3131, or by email noah@noah.co.uk or look
at the NOAH website www.noah.co.uk
2. The National Office of Animal Health was formed on 1
January 1986 to represent the UK companies which research, develop,
manufacture and market licensed animal health products. The association has
32 corporate members and 13 associate members. In 2004 NOAH's members
accounted for well over 90% of the £420 million UK animal health market
3. The term ‘generic’ medicine is poorly understood and
often misquoted. A generic medicine is not simply an ‘out of patent’
medicine, nor necessarily a human medicine. A generic animal medicine is a
‘copy of an out-of-patent medicine for which bioequivalence has been
demonstrated in the target animal species’ – and that is the really crucial
point. Generic substitution of a veterinary medicine with a human medicine
is not permitted by EU law under the prescribing cascade.
|