(The quickest way to register)

Forum

  1. User picture
    • PharmacyChecker on Tue 28 Jun 2011
    • 03:49:37 PM UTC

    Online Pharmacy Ratings Undermine WOT Credibility and Uninsured Americans

    Online Pharmacies and Web of Trust (WOT): Undermining WOT’s Credibility and American Consumers

    WOT shows a poor reputation score for the most reputable international online pharmacies, thus calling into question its system for helping people determine which sites they can and cannot trust. Poor reputations on WOT of reputable international online pharmacies are not the result of their disgruntled customers but of a handful of Platinum raters that support the position of the pharmaceutical and U.S. pharmacy industries against personal drug importation. We hope that the information below encourages WOT’s raters to revisit online pharmacy reputation ratings to correct misperceptions and reputations in this area to bring some justice to the WOT environment. For full disclosure, I am the vice president of PharmacyChecker.com, an independent, private company, that evaluates online pharmacies, including international ones, and our website has fallen victim to similar low reputation ratings, even though we’re not a pharmacy.

    In asking WOT’s reviewers to objectively approach the online pharmacy area, it’s important to define a “reputable international online pharmacy”. We believe that a reputable online pharmacy is one at which orders placed for prescription medication will be filled by a licensed pharmacy, under the supervision of a licensed pharmacist, prescriptions are required, personal and financial information is protected, verifiable phone number and mailing address is published on the website, and genuine medication is dispensed. Empirical studies and customer experience show that properly verified online pharmacies, foreign and domestic, sell genuine medication and require a prescription, and that such online pharmacies provide an ethical service are “reputable” (See: http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/jo....

    WOT’s credibility is not the most important thing at stake here, although that, too, especially to all of you in the WOT community, is important. Since reputable international online pharmacies sell the same brand name medicines found in the United States at a much lower price, they are often a lifeline for uninsured Americans who highly value and sometimes desperately need those services. What are the consequences of WOT’s ratings when they lead an uninsured American not to trust an affordable online pharmacy that should be trusted?

    On the lighter side, although still unfortunate, Americans looking to save money online for prescription drugs could be scared away from ordering from a safe online pharmacy because WOT gives it a poor rating and end up paying more from a neighborhood or chain pharmacy. On the darker side, misleading WOT ratings may discourage an uninsured American – who is unable to afford the prices at a U.S. pharmacy – from purchasing safe and affordable medication online, resulting in that person not taking needed medication; that person could get sick and even die. In fact, drug affordability is a major national health crisis in the U.S. that gets far too little attention. According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 25 million Americans did not take their prescribed medication in 2009 due to cost (See: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41629551/ns/health-hea.... Reports have shown that one hundred and twenty-five thousand Americans die each year because they do not take their prescribed medications. Reports also show that 20% of hospitalizations and about $300 billion in healthcare dollars (according to the FDA) are attributed to Americans not taking their medication each year (See: http://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2011/03/09.... Since, as the government has asserted, adherence to prescription drug regiments is affected by prices, when Americans are deterred from access to safe and affordable medication their health is put at risk.

    How and Why Are WOT’s Ratings of International Online Pharmacies Misleading?

    There are several reasons, all interrelated, why WOT’s ratings are wrongly skewed against reputable international online pharmacies. WOT has teamed up with LegitScript.com as a trusted “third party” that verifies online pharmacies and therefore lends more weight to LegitScript.com’s ratings. LegitScript.com considers as “unapproved” all non-U.S. online pharmacies that sell to Americans, not necessarily on the basis of safety or trustworthiness but because of U.S. laws that proscribe the practice of importing prescription drugs. What does this mean in the real world? A licensed Canadian pharmacy that meets the highest standards of online pharmacy safety, which serves Americans who have only had great experiences with the pharmacy service, would receive an “unapproved” status from LegitScript.com.

    The National Association of Boards of Pharmacy (NABP), which is now the conventionally recognized authority on online pharmacies, publishes a Not Recommended List of online pharmacies that considers all non-U.S. online pharmacies, regardless of their credentials as “rogue”. The “blacklist” contains mostly dangerous, “real rogue” online pharmacies but it also includes reputable international online pharmacies. Real rogue online pharmacies sell real or fake drugs without requiring a prescription, steal personal and financial information, and sometimes, partake in organized crime. In complete contrast, reputable international online pharmacies safely sell genuine medication at an affordable price and require a prescription. This categorization is unfair to American consumers who are looking online for affordable medication and will wrongly believe that all NABP’s Not Recommended sites are “rogues”.

    LegitScript.com and NABP’s position on why they include otherwise safe online pharmacies on their blacklists is that federal laws prohibit buying drugs from Canada or other countries. Equally as important, they are also clearly influenced by the agenda of big pharmaceutical and U.S. pharmacy companies. Let’s be clear – it is technically against the law in the United States to personally import medication. The reason I write “technically” is because the FDA does not take enforcement actions against individuals who personally import non-controlled medication for their own use. In practice, the millions of Americans who have ordered non-controlled prescription drugs from licensed Canadian and other foreign pharmacies almost always receive their medication and, to my knowledge, in accordance with FDA policy, are never prosecuted. Even when the FDA seizes a shipment from time to time it is usually released to the patient.

    The global pharmaceutical and the U.S. pharmacy industries are against personal drug importation, or any pharmaceutical importation that undermines their profits. This is very straightforward business. When an American buys Flovent online from Canada for $41 instead of $108 from a U.S. pharmacy, GlaxoSmithKline makes less money, and that is one less sale for a U.S. pharmacy (if the American would have been able to afford the $108). Interestingly, GlaxoSmithKline still makes money on the sale but less so. The one benefiting most from the international purchase is the uninsured American who saves 62%. And what about safety? The drug was manufactured by Merck and sold in Canada. It’s stupid to argue that GlaxoSmithKline is selling a dangerous version of Flovent in Canada.

    How are the NABP and LegitScript.com Guided by Corporate Interests?

    The NABP’s Internet Drug Outlet Identification Program, which blacklists all international online pharmacies, was sponsored in 2008 with a grant from Pfizer, the world’s largest drug manufacturer (See: See: http://www.nabp.net/news/nabp-names-79-internet-dr.... Pfizer has spent many millions of dollars opposing the legalization of personal drug importation. Pfizer and other large pharmaceutical companies, often through the Pharmaceutical Researchers and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA) fund groups that operate as non-profit organizations to bring the message to the public, media, and policy-makers that all non-U.S. online pharmacies that sell prescription drugs to Americans are dangerous.

    The NABP also represents the interests of U.S. pharmacy boards, who are generally opposed to personal drug importation as it means lower sales for U.S. pharmacies. So NABP is tied to the pharmaceutical and U.S. pharmacy industries. LegitScript.com, generally, is connected to the pharmaceutical and U.S. pharmacy industries as a founding member of Alliance for Safe Online Pharmacies, in which NABP has “observer status” as well. LegitScript.com also has or had pharmaceutical clients that seek to shutdown any online pharmacy, safe or not, that undercuts its profits. Now LegitScript.com also works for the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to assist it with issues relating to online pharmacy. While this last point doesn’t prove LegitScript’s ties to the pharmaceutical industry, it’s well-known that the FDA is more lock-step right now with the corporate pharmaceutical agenda. Also, LegitScript.com issues misleading reports that attempt to discredit reputable international online pharmacies that are then cited by groups funded by the pharmaceutical industry as valid research. It should be known LegitScript.com’s reports and efforts have also resulted in the shutdown of truly rogue online pharmacies, which we all support.

    Several prominent WOT raters, such as g7w, shazza, and Tompo2000 have adopted the NABP’s and LegitScript.com’s position about all non-U.S. online pharmacies. Using their ability to rate reputations in bulk, using the Mass Rating Tool, such Platinum raters have been able to rate all, or almost all, 7000 websites on the NABP’s Not Recommended List (See: http://www.mywot.com/wiki/Mass_rating_tool). Several of the sites listed are safe and reputable online pharmacies, as defined above. Such Platinum raters have been accused of operating as shills for the NABP or LegitScript.com but there is no concrete evidence to support such accusations. Nonetheless, we find that international online pharmacies are all given poor reputations because a few prominent Platinum raters admittedly give the lowest ratings to any online pharmacy that is “unapproved” by Legitscript.com, or on the NABP’s “Not Recommended” list. Some also comment that Americans ordering from international online pharmacies are breaking the law, indicating that that’s the reason such websites have poor reputations.

    The facts remain that some international online pharmacies offer mail-order pharmacy services equal to those offered in the United States, and that such pharmacies are needed by uninsured Americans to afford their medications. Those sites are maligned on WOT by some prominent reviewers, not because they are untrustworthy or unsafe, but because they support the positions of the NABP and LegitScript.com, which are firmly aligned with the commercial interests of the pharmaceutical and U.S. pharmacy industries. WOT’s credibility is undercut when a whole class of trustworthy sites, especially pharmacies, are wrongly painted black. Much worse, it seriously disadvantages Americans searching for safe and affordable medication online. We hope that the WOT community will analyze and review international online pharmacies in a fair and balanced manner; and oppose reviewers when their reviews do not reflect a websites’ trustworthiness but do reflect what is clearly a corporate agenda. In doing so, the WOT community will better serve the larger arena of consumers who look to WOT for help, such as uninsured Americans struggling to afford their medication.

Comments:

  2. User picture
    • Scientific Frontline (not verified) on Tue 28 Jun 2011
    • 04:17:08 PM UTC

    RE: Online Pharmacy Ratings Undermine WOT Credibility and Uninsu

    and if after that you still feel like reading.
    From Public Library of Science One
    http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.137...

    Note the mention in "Introduction" paragraph 3 (three)

    Read all carefully!

    Here is a statement from PLoS One:
    Political Discussion and Conclusions

    This study demonstrates that there are many website pharmacies, including those from overseas, from which it is almost certainly safe to procure medicines; indeed, all of the pharmacies approved by both NABP and PharmacyChecker.com passed the authentication spectrometry tests undertaken in this study.

     
  3. User picture
    • Scientific Frontline (not verified) on Tue 28 Jun 2011
    • 04:43:29 PM UTC

    RE: Online Pharmacy Ratings Undermine WOT Credibility and Uninsu

    Confirmed. pharmacychecker.com
    Is not listed on the NABP’s Not Recommended list, as stated they were on a scorecard comment.
    http://www.nabp.net/ip2.asp

     
  4. User picture
    • BobJam (not verified) on Tue 28 Jun 2011
    • 05:04:52 PM UTC

    RE: Online Pharmacy Ratings Undermine WOT Credibility and Uninsu

    An excerpt from that study that SF linked to may be pertinent for consumers:

    "Even assuming all substitutes were bioequivalent copies (i.e. generics), risks remain for unwary purchasers of drugs over the Internet"

    Now, whether you choose PharmacyChecker, NABP, or LegitScript for your guideline may be the determining factor for your purchases, but at the end of the day, it comes down to "risk" about safety and the report's caution that "risks remain for unwary purchasers of drugs over the Internet".

    So, the task for each consumer is to decide not only which guideline entity to use (and I guess I should put WOT in there too) but also how to minimize risk and balance it with cost.

    From what I've seen, the general guideline is:

    The higher the cost, the lower the risk.

    The lower the cost, the higher the risk.

    BUT, let me quickly point out . . . the above two statements are not always true (which is why I used the phrase "general guideline" . . . it is by no means universal or to be considered a "rule").

    EDIT: This is a touchy subject since it concerns two hotbutton issues that are not always balanced for consumers: your pocketbook and your safety. And "legal" considerations is a whole 'nother issue for consumer consideration.
  5. User picture
    • Scientific Frontline (not verified) on Tue 28 Jun 2011
    • 05:20:51 PM UTC

    RE: Online Pharmacy Ratings Undermine WOT Credibility and Uninsu

    As I stated on the scorecard, use commonsense and your gut instinct.
    I'll personally will keep going to my local pharmacy, and even then folks read your scripts and validate you have received what the doctor prescribed.

     
  6. User picture
    • SuperHero58 on Tue 28 Jun 2011
    • 07:44:52 PM UTC

    RE: Online Pharmacy Ratings Undermine WOT Credibility and Uninsu

    @ PharmacyChecker =

    Dear sir or madam , I left you a pm , which now is open to any one that says
    In reference to a post left for a rogue pharmacy
    R156-83-306. Drugs Approved for Online Prescribing, Dispensing, and Facilitation.

    In accordance with Subsection 58-83-306(1)(c), the following legend, non-controlled drugs are approved for prescribing by an online prescriber:

    (1) finasteride;

    (2) sildenafil citrate;

    (3) tadalafil;

    (4) vardenafil hydrochlorid;

    (5) hormonal based contraception (except injectable or implantable methods); and

    (6) varenicline.

    Non Controlled !
    That was to the remarks left in scorecards by you and others that you could sell this medications w/o prescription !
    Undermine WOT Credibility and Uninsured Americans
    Your lack of credibility is what is in question
    Good day !
  7. User picture
    • BobJam (not verified) on Wed 29 Jun 2011
    • 04:40:05 AM UTC

    RE: Online Pharmacy Ratings Undermine WOT Credibility and Uninsu

    @ PharmacyChecker,

    Looooong rant, but stimulates a worthwhile debate anyway.

    Though I think I might have left the "Undermines WOT Credibility" stuff out of there. That dilutes your arguments . . . I mean, that's like going onto an IE forum, arguing that FF is better and then ending the argument with "IE is crap". You've put a lot of members in this forum on the defensive and shifted the debate to emotional issues on an already touchy subject.

    IOW, you've lit a distracting fire (mentioning "Undermine WOT Credibility") under an already brightly burning topic.

    While you are certainly entitled to your opinion about WOT, there are times that opinions are best left unsaid . . . I think this was one of them.

    EDIT: The other issues you brought up would have been sufficient for some members to deduce your opinion of WOT without having to see the statement outright.
  8. User picture
    • uhka tutka (not verified) on Wed 29 Jun 2011
    • 05:09:17 AM UTC

    RE: Online Pharmacy Ratings Undermine WOT Credibility and Uninsu

    Tip: too much text.
  9. User picture
    • BobJam (not verified) on Wed 29 Jun 2011
    • 07:15:58 AM UTC

    RE: Online Pharmacy Ratings Undermine WOT Credibility and Uninsu

    @ PharmacyChecker,

    Here's an exercise that I probably should do more myself since some of my posts tend to be long winded also:

    Assume that people glaze over after about 20 to 30 seconds of reading . . . which is a pretty safe assumption.

    Time the reading of your post, using a normal reading pace so that the concepts can be digested.

    Now, at the 20 to 30 second mark . . . THAT is when people are going to start to dial out and everything you say after that will be missed/ignored.

    So, put yourself in their place, and force yourself to distill your "novel" down to the most important points in the first 20 to 30 seconds.

    Or better yet, consider what it would look like in an abstract and write that.

    You can always offer to expand on a concept and likely do that IN SMALL bursts in response to questions anyway. Much easier to digest.
  10. User picture
    • uhka tutka (not verified) on Wed 29 Jun 2011
    • 09:10:53 AM UTC

    RE: Online Pharmacy Ratings Undermine WOT Credibility and Uninsu

    Originally posted by: BobJam
    @ PharmacyChecker,

    Here's an exercise that I probably should do more myself since some of my posts tend to be long winded also:

    Assume that people glaze over after about 20 to 30 seconds of reading . . . which is a pretty safe assumption.

    Time the reading of your post, using a normal reading pace so that the concepts can be digested.

    Now, at the 20 to 30 second mark . . . THAT is when people are going to start to dial out and everything you say after that will be missed/ignored.

    So, put yourself in their place, and force yourself to distill your "novel" down to the most important points in the first 20 to 30 seconds.

    Or better yet, consider what it would look like in an abstract and write that.

    You can always offer to expand on a concept and likely do that IN SMALL bursts in response to questions anyway. Much easier to digest.

    No offense, but echo that! ~smiles~
  11. User picture
    • Scientific Frontline (not verified) on Wed 29 Jun 2011
    • 12:58:26 PM UTC

    RE: Online Pharmacy Ratings Undermine WOT Credibility and Uninsu

    Originally posted by: SuperHero58
    @ PharmacyChecker =

    Dear sir or madam , I left you a pm , which now is open to any one that says
    In reference to a post left for a rogue pharmacy
    R156-83-306. Drugs Approved for Online Prescribing, Dispensing, and Facilitation.

    In accordance with Subsection 58-83-306(1)(c), the following legend, non-controlled drugs are approved for prescribing by an online prescriber:

    (1) finasteride;

    (2) sildenafil citrate;

    (3) tadalafil;

    (4) vardenafil hydrochlorid;

    (5) hormonal based contraception (except injectable or implantable methods); and

    (6) varenicline.

    Non Controlled !
    That was to the remarks left in scorecards by you and others that you could sell this medications w/o prescription !
    Undermine WOT Credibility and Uninsured Americans
    Your lack of credibility is what is in question
    Good day !

    Link please where PharmacyChecker.com stated please.

    Just a side note:
    a non controlled prescription can be prescribed by a doctor without being seen. A online perscriber.

    Lets take a quick look at varenicline (Chantix), a stop smoking medication.
    Current cost in the USA to complete the 12 week program is up to $1000.00
    That's insane and gouging the those in need.

    Sounds like only the rich are allowed to become healthy.

     
  12. User picture
    • Scientific Frontline (not verified) on Wed 29 Jun 2011
    • 01:01:46 PM UTC

    RE: Online Pharmacy Ratings Undermine WOT Credibility and Uninsu

    Thanks Sami for restoring this thread. Was puzzled why a moderator would hide such.

     
  13. User picture
    • Scientific Frontline (not verified) on Wed 29 Jun 2011
    • 01:04:19 PM UTC

    RE: Online Pharmacy Ratings Undermine WOT Credibility and Uninsu

    Originally posted by: uhka tutka
    No offense, but echo that! ~smiles~

    Yep and the echo continues. Certainly an overkill, and most wont read.

     
  14. User picture
    • BobJam (not verified) on Wed 29 Jun 2011
    • 04:08:00 PM UTC

    Echo

    Originally posted by: Scientific Frontline
    Thanks Sami for restoring this thread. Was puzzled why a moderator would hide such.

     

    Me too.

    Would be nice if the moderator explained the reasoning . . . maybe there's something here we're missing.
  15. User picture
    • SuperHero58 on Wed 29 Jun 2011
    • 04:34:25 PM UTC

    RE: Online Pharmacy Ratings Undermine WOT Credibility and Uninsu

    @ Scientific Frontline = I was a bit furious and I did not explain myself properly

    At some of the illegal sites I noticed that, those who down-rated our-post, will use these words in their text:

    In accordance with Subsection 58-83-306(1)(c) of the State of Utah, these sites were allowed to sell w/o a prescription -

    The medications advertised were Viagra, Propecia and other drugs that do need a prescription

    I went to the official site of the Government of the state of Utah and I did study this particular law in which, only the mentioned medicines (the ones in previous post) were allowed to be sold over the internet w/o a prescription and that did not include controlled substances

    I am sorry that I did not explain myself better, but as I told you I was so upset that I went out for a cigarette, until realized I did not smoke

    It was a hectic day, Heidi
    Edit =
  16. User picture
    • AlphaCentauri on Wed 29 Jun 2011
    • 04:44:54 PM UTC

    RE: Online Pharmacy Ratings Undermine WOT Credibility and Uninsu

    I have had discussions with John from LegitScript about their ratings. They distinguish "rogue" from "unapproved" pharmacies. Unapproved pharmacies aren't legal, but there's no reason to think they aren't safe. We need to pay attention to that distinction, too. Anything sold via legal Canadian drug channels was subject to the same manufacturing scrutiny as US products. The main risk is that people are fooled by websites that falsely claim to be Canadian or falsely claim to have CIPA or PharmacyChecker approval. Most people don't understand how to click through to the validation of those logos on a website. They should also understand they aren't protected by the US tort system, but it's sort of like saving money on "limited tort" auto insurance.

    Websites that claim to be pharmacies but only have a post office box and just funnel orders to third countries whose quality controls are less stringent are another matter. It's true that there are some high quality pharmaceutical manufacturers in India, and that many of the generics now available in the US are manufactured there. But it's also true there is a lot of counterfeiting and adulteration. When liquid acetaminophen was taken off the market in India, the number of cases of unexplained renal failure dropped dramatically, since so many cases were due to the use of diethylene glycol syrup in children's medications. If those Indian manufacturers are reputable, then let Americans order from them directly, rather than having them hidden behind a Canadian facade. (And once you get to other Asian countries, I'm even less confident.)

    @ SuperHero58: "controlled" in this context means drugs with abuse potential, like narcotics and sedatives, not all prescription drugs.
  17. User picture
    • SuperHero58 on Wed 29 Jun 2011
    • 05:52:53 PM UTC

    RE: Online Pharmacy Ratings Undermine WOT Credibility and Uninsu

    .

    @ SuperHero58: "controlled" in this context means drugs with abuse potential, like narcotics and sedatives, not all prescription drugs.

    " The medications advertised were Viagra, Propecia and other drugs that do need a prescription "

    I never said otherwise

    In the other hand is not legal to dispense without a prescription

    And I would not trust a pharmacy that will be willing to break the law to do business, it would not be much a problem to use it for criminal activities and at best, just send junk -

    Unapproved pharmacies aren't legal, but there's no reason to think they aren't safe.

    A criminal activity is taking place the moment that a pharmacy goes illegal, how would I know that the quality is the same?

    Could you trust someone that breaks such law?

    Just on ethics alone, it would get a red!

    "Most people don't understand how to click through to the validation of those logos on a website. They should also understand they aren't protected by the US tort system, but it's sort of like saving money on "limited tort" auto insurance."

    The reason the DEA, FBI and FDA are there for, I could not imagine an American doctor breaking the law without knowing the consequences, as for the analogy of a "limited tort "auto insurance, tell that to the officer, when he or she asks you for insurance papers and see if the officer would agree to your explanation

    In a nutshell there are two kinds of pharmacies, legal and illegal and I will rate those who violate the law, as not worth the seal of trust, in particular with such important issue as the health of another human -
    Edit =
  18. User picture
    • AlphaCentauri on Wed 29 Jun 2011
    • 08:53:40 PM UTC

    RE: Online Pharmacy Ratings Undermine WOT Credibility and Uninsu

    Reimporting drugs from Canada is actually more complex than legal vs. illegal. Some state governments in the US have defied federal law by having their employee prescriptions filled by reputable Canadian mail order pharmacies. It's legal to drive across the border to buy your meds, but not to have them mailed the same distance across the border in the other direction. There are stores operating quite openly that drive across the border for their customers, buy their meds, and bring them back; not sure what their legal status is. For the most part, the patent protections are the same in Canada and the US, so it's not like India where they produce generic copies of drugs still under patent protection in Europe and North America because their patents used to be for only 5 years (I think).

    It's a lot like medical marijuana: It's illegal everywhere in the US by virtue of federal law, but some states have legally approved it with a doctor's prescription in defiance of federal law.

    The websites that PharmacyChecker approves all require prescriptions; that's not a matter of disagreement. (However, plenty of scam websites that don't require prescriptions will display a counterfeit PharmacyChecker or "PharmaChecker" seal, just as they might use a fake WOT seal.)
  19. User picture
    • BobJam (not verified) on Wed 29 Jun 2011
    • 09:10:26 PM UTC

    RE: Online Pharmacy Ratings Undermine WOT Credibility and Uninsu

    Originally posted by: AlphaCentauri
    Reimporting drugs from Canada is actually more complex than legal vs. illegal. Some state governments in the US have defied federal law by having their employee prescriptions filled by reputable Canadian mail order pharmacies. It's legal to drive across the border to buy your meds, but not to have them mailed the same distance across the border in the other direction. There are stores operating quite openly that drive across the border for their customers, buy their meds, and bring them back; not sure what their legal status is. For the most part, the patent protections are the same in Canada and the US, so it's not like India where they produce generic copies of drugs still under patent protection in Europe and North America because their patents used to be for only 5 years (I think).

    It's a lot like medical marijuana: It's illegal everywhere in the US by virtue of federal law, but some states have legally approved it with a doctor's prescription in defiance of federal law.

    The websites that PharmacyChecker approves all require prescriptions; that's not a matter of disagreement. (However, plenty of scam websites that don't require prescriptions will display a counterfeit PharmacyChecker or "PharmaChecker" seal, just as they might use a fake WOT seal.)

    So it's state law versus federal law in some cases?

    Does legality have anything to do with safety?
  20. User picture
    • SuperHero58 on Wed 29 Jun 2011
    • 10:06:37 PM UTC

    RE: Online Pharmacy Ratings Undermine WOT Credibility and Uninsu

    @ AlphaCentauri =

    This is from the FDA
    "Medication/Drugs
    The Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the Act) prohibits persons from importing into the United States any prescription drug that has not been approved for sale by the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA), or which is adulterated or misbranded within the meaning of the Act. Moreover, in those instances where a United States manufacturer makes an FDA-approved prescription drug and sends it abroad, the Act also prohibits any person other than the original manufacturer from importing the drug back into the United States. Thus, in virtually all instances, individual citizens are prohibited from importing prescription drugs into the United States."

    There is nothing complex behind this, IS illegal!
    I trust the FDA to overlook the medicine or drugs that I may need, now if anyone wants to break the law is up to them, but we cannot deviate from the fact that these companies are ILLEGALLY doing business with customers from the United States, and they know it, I noticed how much they care about changing the laws in this country, but never do they say that most medications are available to low income families that make less than $24,000 a year for free or for an average of $30.00 every three months

    And that there are many plans to help, those who cannot afford their medications "connection to Care" or "RX outreach "and they will not tell you because at the end what they truly care is about the money they will make by breaking the law that is unethical

    Can I trust someone like that, No!

    No with my health, money or personal information!

    They already crossed a line, what more can they have to lose?

    Nothing!

    Best wishes !
  21. User picture
    • Scientific Frontline (not verified) on Thu 30 Jun 2011
    • 12:52:04 AM UTC

    RE: Online Pharmacy Ratings Undermine WOT Credibility and Uninsu

    There is one issue that is not being considered. They don't sell drugs, but verify pharmacies for the legitimacy of the product they sell.. and they have been validated by PLoS One as accurate at such validation.

    Anyhow I have decided to take this in a different direction, and involve NABP in conversation..
    I'll let you know of the answers as soon as I have completed discussion with them.

     
  22. User picture
    • Scientific Frontline (not verified) on Thu 30 Jun 2011
    • 12:56:20 AM UTC

    RE: Online Pharmacy Ratings Undermine WOT Credibility and Uninsu

    Originally posted by: SuperHero58
    @ Scientific Frontline =

    I am sorry that I did not explain myself better, but as I told you I was so upset that I went out for a cigarette, until realized I did not smoke

    It was a hectic day, Heidi
    Edit =

    I understand that all too well dear one, been hectic around here also.
  23. User picture
    • AlphaCentauri on Thu 30 Jun 2011
    • 02:10:24 AM UTC

    RE: Online Pharmacy Ratings Undermine WOT Credibility and Uninsu

    Originally posted by: BobJam
    So it's state law versus federal law in some cases?

    Does legality have anything to do with safety?

    If the drugs are really from Canada through legitimate channels, no. They're the same drugs. The US drug companies ship them to Canada and the online pharmacies mail them back. They're cheaper in Canada because the Canadian government sets the prices, as do most governments in Europe, I believe. Since the US is about the only government that refuses to consider any price controls, prices are correspondingly higher in the US, so that we foot the entire bill for R&D instead of it being spread equally among all patients who benefit.

    The US also has huge marketing costs. Previously the FDA controlled this, but the Supreme Court ruled it was a violation of free speech, and the direct to consumer marketing campaign with its endless TV commercials was born. Think of the money spent for political campaigns, but there's no election to bring an end to it until the drug comes off patent 20 years later. It adds a massive amount of cost to the drugs. In addition to the ads consumers see, there are ads in medical journals, representatives that visit doctors' offices (often multiple representatives for each drug), educational conferences (the content is not determined by the drug companies, but they always just happen to be about diseases for which there are expensive new drugs available), and lunches for doctors' staffs so they can get a crack at talking to the doctors when they stop seeing patients long enough to eat. There are free samples for doctors to keep in their offices, and those are the primary source of free drugs to people who don't have prescription insurance.

    The US tort system is also much more plaintiff friendly than Canada, where it's loser-pays. When different rights compete in the US, like the right to obtain health care vs. the right to bring a lawsuit, the lawsuit always gets priority. When you hear about how much Merck is paying out for Vioxx suits, be assured they don't have a printing press to create more money when they need it. It's part of the cost of doing business, and that cost is paid by consumers who buy their other drugs until those drugs go off patent.

    As far as the patient assistance programs: Yes, they exist. Some companies' programs (like Merck's) are pretty helpful. Others are not. Frequently the programs are structured in such a way that if a patient doesn't qualify for medical assistance, they won't qualify for the manufacturer's program, either. Very few take into consideration the fact that patients may be able to afford one prescription from one manufacturer, but not multiple drugs from multiple manufacturers that total hundreds of dollars a month -- each company expects the patient to pay for their drug and to get the other manufacturers to provide charity. Almost all programs are a total pain in the butt for the doctor's office staff to deal with, which is why your doctor probably doesn't suggest them to more people.
  24. User picture
    • Scientific Frontline (not verified) on Thu 30 Jun 2011
    • 02:40:19 AM UTC

    RE: Online Pharmacy Ratings Undermine WOT Credibility and Uninsu

    Note: PharmacyChecker.com
    is not blacklisted by spamcop, the information isn't correct.
    or blacklisted by anyone.
    http://www.mxtoolbox.com/SuperTool.aspx?action=mx%...

     
  25. User picture
    • BobJam (not verified) on Thu 30 Jun 2011
    • 12:59:55 PM UTC

    RE: Online Pharmacy Ratings Undermine WOT Credibility and Uninsu

    SF's and AC's conclusion is that PharmacyChecker is legit then, not a pharmacy itself, and not listed as "bad" on NABP or LegitScript?

    Don't mean to put words in anybodies mouth, which is why I phrased it as a question.

    Would be nice if PharmacyChecker posted again in this thread (abbreviated, of course . . . not as lengthy as the OP).
  26. User picture
    • Scientific Frontline (not verified) on Fri 01 Jul 2011
    • 02:20:04 PM UTC

    RE: Online Pharmacy Ratings Undermine WOT Credibility and Uninsu

    Originally posted by: BobJam
    SF's and AC's conclusion is that PharmacyChecker is legit then, not a pharmacy itself, and not listed as "bad" on NABP or LegitScript?

    Don't mean to put words in anybodies mouth, which is why I phrased it as a question.

    Would be nice if PharmacyChecker posted again in this thread (abbreviated, of course . . . not as lengthy as the OP).

    Yes, at the moment that is my conclusion. They are a legit business that assures pharmacies, and the products from legal online pharmacies are up to required standards.
    Although I'm still in open dialog with some sources.

    As always I reserve the right to change my rating due to any new information that may arise.
    I will also be more then happy to let you all know of any correction.

     
  27. User picture
    • Scientific Frontline (not verified) on Fri 01 Jul 2011
    • 03:27:37 PM UTC

    RE: Online Pharmacy Ratings Undermine WOT Credibility and Uninsu

    Two pages you might want to look at:
    Verification:
    hxxps://www.pharmacychecker.com/sealprogram/choose.asp
    A list of Rogue Pharmacies:
    hxxps://www.pharmacychecker.com/rogue-pharmacies.asp

     
  28. User picture
    • Scientific Frontline (not verified) on Fri 01 Jul 2011
    • 03:48:27 PM UTC

    RE: Online Pharmacy Ratings Undermine WOT Credibility and Uninsu

    Originally posted by: AlphaCentauri
    As far as the patient assistance programs: Yes, they exist. Some companies' programs (like Merck's) are pretty helpful. Others are not. Frequently the programs are structured in such a way that if a patient doesn't qualify for medical assistance, they won't qualify for the manufacturer's program, either. Very few take into consideration the fact that patients may be able to afford one prescription from one manufacturer, but not multiple drugs from multiple manufacturers that total hundreds of dollars a month -- each company expects the patient to pay for their drug and to get the other manufacturers to provide charity. Almost all programs are a total pain in the butt for the doctor's office staff to deal with, which is why your doctor probably doesn't suggest them to more people.

    I've tried to get on some of the programs, and gave it up due to the hassle.

    With Medicare Part D and with a secondary insurance, my monthly out of pocket still is about 500.00 a month.
    We can pay it, yet it's tough. . . I have no clue how most do.

     
  29. User picture
    • BobJam (not verified) on Fri 01 Jul 2011
    • 05:34:39 PM UTC

    RE: Online Pharmacy Ratings Undermine WOT Credibility and Uninsu

    Originally posted by: Scientific Frontline
    I've tried to get on some of the programs, and gave it up due to the hassle.

    With Medicare Part B and with a secondary insurance, my monthly out of pocket still is about 500.00 a month.
    We can pay it, yet it's tough. . . I have no clue how most do.

     

    You mean "Part D"?
  30. User picture
    • Scientific Frontline (not verified) on Fri 01 Jul 2011
    • 05:37:35 PM UTC

    RE: Online Pharmacy Ratings Undermine WOT Credibility and Uninsu

    Originally posted by: BobJam
    You mean "Part D"?
    Yes I do indeed.

    Actually Mandy corrected me before you, I just hadn't got back.
    She handles all that crap for me.

    She says I'm too mean when dealing with people like insurance matters. Nonsense, I can't see me being like that.
    Too many parts.

    So tell me, is yours just as worn out LOL

     
  31. User picture
    • g7w on Fri 01 Jul 2011
    • 07:27:16 PM UTC

    RE: Online Pharmacy Ratings Undermine WOT Credibility and Uninsu

    Long thread
    extremely long OP

    excuse me if I haven't read the entire OP nor the replies; I just do not have that much time to involve myself with this topic.

    What I did read of the OP:
    We believe that a reputable online pharmacy is one at which orders placed for prescription medication will be filled by a licensed pharmacy, under the supervision of a licensed pharmacist, prescriptions are required, personal and financial information is protected, verifiable phone number and mailing address is published on the website, and genuine medication is dispensed.

    @ pharmacychecker
    Checking your list of approved pharmacies / "pharmacy affiliates" I see no information provided by either the site or the pharmacychecker profile page that identifies the pharmacist associated with the site, as per The Internet Pharmacy Consumer Protection Act
    re: http://www.ryanscause.org/ryan-haight-bill.html

    drug names referenced on pharmacychecker.com are all [affiliate] linked,to pharmacychecker "approved' sites.
    example:
    Abilify - hxxp://pharmacychecker.com/Strength.asp?DrugId=24894
    first dosage link: 1 mg/ml - hxxp://pharmacychecker.com/Pricing.asp?DrugName=Abilify&DrugId=24894&DrugStrengthId=127484
    resulting with:

    • canadrugs.com affiliate link: hxxp://pharmacychecker.com/CPCCLick.asp?GUID=9107882D-D207-4CBB-8B48-11A39884EF1E&DrugQuantityId=281441&DrugStrengthId=127484&Position=1
    • northwestpharmacy.com affiliate link: hxxp://pharmacychecker.com/CPCCLick.asp?GUID=8811E396-88C2-4A5A-93AD-DFBEDE5C3246&DrugQuantityId=276502&DrugStrengthId=127484&Position=2
    • etc., etc.

    Interesting how there are no US pharmacies "approved" with pharmacychecker...

    PharmachChecker.com encourages illegal activity by referencing non-US online pharmacies to US consumers though they provide the following disclaimer:
    • U.S. Law: U.S.
      government officials have stated that individuals who order non-controlled prescription drugs from Canada or other foreign sources (up to a three-month supply) for their own use are not being pursued or prosecuted. However, it is technically not legal for individuals to import most prescription drugs.
    • Coverage by Insurance:
      For a drug to be reimbursable from a health reimbursement account or flexible spending account it must be approved for sale in the U.S. and prescribed by a licensed U.S. physician, although drugs which you personally import are typically not reimbursable. If you have pharmacy insurance coverage, you may want to check with your benefits administrator to determine whether drugs ordered from outside the U.S. will be covered or reimbursed.

    The OP title: Online Pharmacy Ratings Undermine WOT Credibility and Uninsured Americans
    WOT credibility should ensure that laws are not broken when interacting with a website, where is PharmacyChecker's credibility?

    As for uninsured Americans, there are [legal] resources available such as: http://www.healthcare.gov/
    and Partnership for Prescription Assistance - http://www.pparx.org/

    ------- WOT Services Ltd. - gives us safety through Web of Trust. WOT Community - gives us security through unity. ∞