Questions Aired About CanaRx Warning Letter
Local governments in the U.S. that use CanaRx to supply prescription drugs for covered employees are raising questions about a recent FDA Warning Letter that says the online pharmacy has delivered unapproved and misbranded drugs to its U.S. consumers. A Kaiser Health News article posted by National Public Radio says that many CanaRx clients say they will stay with the firm for now, despite the Warning Letter.
The post says FDA officials would not explain why they waited more than a decade to act against CanaRx and acknowledged they had no reports of anyone harmed by drugs obtained through the company.
The Kaiser article quotes many local governments about their good experiences with CanaRx and the savings experienced by their employees who use the service. CanaRx says it acts as a broker between U.S. employees and brick-and-mortar pharmacies in Canada, Australia, and Great Britain. Clients are required to have a prescription from their doctor.
A Chicago-based lawyer for the company, Joseph Morris, told Kaiser that “FDA’s characterizations of the CanaRx business model and operating protocols are completely wrong. It is not possible to place an order via any CanaRx Web site. The Web sites are informational only.”
In its letter, FDA said clients might actually be sent drugs from countries other than Great Britain, Canada, and Australia, which would increase the risk that they are getting counterfeit drugs.
The post also quotes pharmacychecker.com president Gabriel Levitt, who verifies international pharmacies offering drugs online. He says the Warning Letter offered no evidence CanaRx has distributed any counterfeit drugs since it began business almost 20 years ago. He said CanaRx is one of the safest ways for Americans to get drugs from legitimate pharmacies in Canada and other industrialized countries.
The agency decision was praised in the article by former FDA associate commissioner Peter Pitts, who now leads the Center for Medicine in the Public Interest, which receives some drug company funding. It also was praised by Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, which said it had no involvement in having the Warning Letter issued.