Recruting tactics of gift certificates to Toys R Us

[Guest guest]

FYI, this should make anyone's skin crawl please carefully read this on pass

on. Perhaps someone will do something positive other than CASH IN.

Jane

ps. the boys won't be healthy for long!

 

" All truth goes through three stages.

First it is ridiculed.

Then it is violently opposed.

Finally, it is accepted as self-evident. "

(Schopenhauer)

 

" Tell me and I forget. Show me and I remember.

Involve me and I understand. "

-- Chinese Proverb

 

 

 

Parenting Magazine published a 5-part report about the impact on

 

children of FDA's " The Pediatric Rule. "

 

That Rule provides drug companies six month patent extension on drugs

 

tested in children.

 

This financial windfall could translate into some $30 billion in added

 

revenue over the next 20 years.

 

According to Parenting Magazine., there are currently about 500 clinical

 

trials involving children who are

 

testing drugs approved for adult drugs. The Pediatric Rule has been

 

thrown out by a federal court on Oct 18,

 

but Senator Clinton is reported to lead the charge to legislate the

 

Pediatric Rule into law.

 

[see AHRP's reasons for opposing mandatory pediatric drug testing and

 

our alternative to the

 

proposed Clinton-DeWine legislation: http://www.ahrp.org ]

 

 

Parenting Magazine reported that " even though some 60,000 kids were

 

enrolled in drug studies last year,

 

pharmaceutical companies need far more. This has left the

 

medical-testing industry in a bit of a crisis,

 

resulting in zealous recruiting tactics, such as promises of gift

 

certificates to Toys " R " Us,

 

Tower Records, and the Gap, to name a few. "

 

 

Those who promote and those who lend their seal of approval to

 

aggressive recruitment of (mostly)

 

disadvantaged children for drug tests expect these children to undergo

 

pain and risks for others.

 

Rosemary Roberts, M.D., Deputy Director, Pediatrics, FDA's Center for

 

Drug Evaluation and Research,

 

would absolve those who approve and oversee pediatric trials of their

 

responsibility to protect children.

 

Dr. Roberts would have us shift that responsibility to the children

 

themselves, stating:

 

" In a trial, there are risks, but hopefully they will be properly

 

outlined to the patients. "

 

 

In September, the Center for Disease Control (CDC) announced plans to

 

test the controversial,

 

and much dreaded smallpox vaccine on children. Yesterday's Wall Street

 

Journal reported that

 

the CDC acknowledged in a briefing that " As many as 50 million

 

Americans, including babies,

 

pregnant women, people with the common skin rash eczema, as well as

 

those with weakened

 

immune systems, may be vulnerable to the vaccine's risks. "

 

 

" Gasps erupted from an audience of microbiologists as one of the

 

government's top smallpox

 

experts displayed slides of children covered with disfiguring pockmarks

 

at a meeting in San

 

Diego last month. " [see: http://phil.cdc.gov/Phil/results.asp?page1

 

 

Paul Offit, chief of the infectious diseases section of Children's

 

Hospital of Philadelphia,

 

who is also a member of the CDC advisory committee, said of the smallpox

 

vaccine:

 

" I would never give that vaccine to my children because right now there

 

is no disease out there. "

 

 

[see: Ugly Side Effects of Smallpox Vaccine Color Terror

 

Plans, by Marilyn Chase and Greg Hill, WSJ, Oct 21, 2002, front page]

 

 

WHOSE CHILDREN ARE BEING RECRUITED in Cincinnati for smallpox vaccine

 

trials?

 

 

Senator Clinton and those who would rush to legislate mandatory drug

 

tests on children

 

seem not to recognize the double moral standard being applied--one for

 

privileged children,

 

the other for underprivileged children.

 

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

http://www.parenting.com/parenting/article/article_general/0,8266,7765,0

 

0.html

 

 

The Drug-Testing Debate (part 1)

 

 

By Jennifer Wolff

 

 

Dan's* blond hair grazes his eyes as they fill with tears. " Take it out!

 

Take it out! " the 9-year-old begs, turning away from the needle in his

 

arm. His dad holds his shoulders flat against the hospital exam table.

 

" You have a birthday party coming up, don't you? Let's think about

 

that, " he whispers into his son's ear.

 

 

Beneath the glaring lights of this examining room at Children's Mercy

 

Hospital, in Kansas City, MO, the nurse grows frustrated trying to find

 

a plump vein beneath Dan's pale and obviously sensitive skin. She pokes

 

him a couple of times before giving up. Teary-eyed, Dan hops onto the

 

floor and nibbles the Rice Krispies Treat that was to be his reward for

 

lying still.

 

 

Chris*, Dan's little brother, climbs up onto the exam table. Although

 

two years younger, he braves the blood draw without so much as a

 

whimper. Then his dad tells Dan to try again. The boy reluctantly gets

 

into position, but this time he starts to cry before the needle even

 

gets close to his arm.

 

 

The nurse tells him to take a deep breath, but he squirms and flaps his

 

leg. " I don't want this, " Dan whispers to no one in particular. His face

 

reddens as the needle hones in. " I don't want to do it, " he screams. " I

 

don't want to... "

 

 

The needle is in. Three tubes of blood are quickly drawn.

 

 

It's hard for any parent to think of his child suffering at the end of a

 

doctor's needle, however necessary. But there's no pressing medical

 

reason for Dan to be enduring this procedure, because he isn't sick. Nor

 

is Chris. Rather, the brothers have been admitted for the day to Mercy's

 

Pediatric Clinical Research Unit because they both are in good health

 

and meet the criteria of a particular study — thus making them perfect

 

human subjects in the burgeoning business of pharmacological drug

 

testing on children.

 

 

Their parents have consented for them to lend their bodies to medical

 

science, in this case to test a heartburn drug long approved by the Food

 

and Drug Administration (FDA) for use in adults, but never for the kids

 

who are nonetheless treated with it regularly. The trial is part of a

 

controversial FDA incentive program that hopes to achieve more accurate

 

labeling for products that children use. By testing this drug in kids

 

like Dan and Chris, its manufacturer will be able to include the correct

 

dosage for children of different ages on its label. And, of course, it

 

stands to make hundreds of millions of dollars.

 

 

" They're using my blood to test if this medicine can save someone's

 

life, " Chris says through a wide, gap-toothed grin, not really clear on

 

the fact that heartburn, which this medication treats, isn't fatal. " But

 

also 'cause Mom said we're going to get money. " For participating in the

 

trial, each of the boys will be paid $190.