take-back program s.f. supervisor proposes drugmakers...
Post on 08-Sep-2018
213 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
10/21/2014 S.F. supervisor proposes drugmakers fund take-back program - SFGate
http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/S-F-supervisor-proposes-drugmakers-fund-5835452.php 1/2
http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/S-F-supervisor-proposes-drugmakers-fund-5835452.php
S.F. supervisor proposes drugmakers fundtake-back programBy Stephanie M. Lee Updated 6:03 pm, Monday, October 20, 2014
After Alameda County became the first in the nation to require pharmaceutical companies to pay for a drug take-back program,
San Francisco may follow suit.
Seeking to prevent overdoses and reduce contaminants in water, Supervisor David Chiu told The Chronicle he will introduce
legislation before the Board of Supervisors Tuesday that would require drugmakers, and no longer taxpayers, to fund the disposal
of unused and unwanted medications.
Because a similar proposal was recently defeated in the California state Legislature, a successful passage in San Francisco could
inspire other counties, one by one, to implement their own laws, proponents of the program say.
San Francisco first tried to pass a drugmaker-funded take-back program in 2010, but under industry pressure, it established a
slimmed-down version that does not require pharmaceutical companies to participate. Then, two years ago, Alameda County set
up its own program that made companies’ participation mandatory — and, despite an industry lawsuit, a federal appeals court
upheld the law last month.
That legal decision, Chiu said, appears to put San Francisco on safe legal ground to require pharmaceutical companies to
participate, too. Like Alameda County, he said, San Francisco is confronting prescription drug abuse, which public health officials
consider to be the fastest-growing drug problem in the nation, accidental overdoses by children and senior citizens, and
wastewater treatment facilities that are not designed to filter pharmaceutical chemicals.
The pilot program has been successful, he said, but it does not go far enough. “Much of the costs are still being borne by taxpayers
rather than the industry that is creating the cost,” Chiu said, “and it’s my perspective that we ought to see producer responsibility
IMAGE 1 OF 5Marwan Nasrah puts unused pills into a drug disposal box at Daniel’s Pharmacy in S.F.
10/21/2014 S.F. supervisor proposes drugmakers fund take-back program - SFGate
http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/S-F-supervisor-proposes-drugmakers-fund-5835452.php 2/2
to address the problem when the residents don’t know what to do with unused and expired medications, which often end up in
unintended hands or in public waterways.”
“The program needs to be significantly expanded to offer adequate and convenient disposal options to residents throughout the
city.”
The Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, the industry trade group, has argued that disposal of unwanted
medicines should be a shared responsibility, that take-back programs unfairly require drugmakers to develop and fund them, and
that higher costs would ultimately be passed on to consumers.
A spokeswoman said the organization had not seen the legislation, but remained concerned that a take-back program could add
costs to the health care system.
San Francisco’s pilot program, which consists of drop-off sites at nearly two dozen independent pharmacies and police stations,
has collected more than 37,000 pounds of medications over the last two years. It costs roughly $162,000 a year to operate, most of
which, according to the city, is unreimbursed city staff time. The rest of the funding comes from the industry’s trade group.
Chiu’s law, if passed, hopes to set up take-back sites at all retail and health care facilities that sell drugs. It would require
drugmakers that make drugs sold in San Francisco to pay all administrative and operational costs of the program.
In addition to Alameda County, King County in Washington has also passed a mandatory drug take-back program. Both are based
on a law in British Columbia. California state Sen. Hannah-Beth Jackson, D-Santa Barbara, introduced a proposal to make such a
program statewide this spring, but it failed to pass out of committee.
Now that the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco has maintained that Alameda County’s ordinance treats all
drugmakers equally and does not place a significant burden on interstate business, other counties could follow suit, said Heidi
Sanborn, executive director of the California Product Stewardship Council, which advocates for manufacturers to pay for the
disposal of drugs, paint, batteries and other hazardous products.
“As some free themselves from fear, it’s going to free others and I think the floodgates are open,” she said.
Stephanie M. Lee is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. E-mail: slee@sfchronicle.com Twitter: @stephaniemlee
top related