Pharmacopolitics: Drug Regulation in the United States and Germany (Studies in Social Medicine)

advocates Of Rapid Access To Medicines And Critics Fearful Of Inadequate Testing Both Argue That Globalization Will Supersede National Medical Practices And Result In The Easy Transfer Of Pharmaceuticals Around The World. In pharmacopolitics , Arthur Daemmrich Challenges Their Assumptions By Comparing Drug Laws, Clinical Trials, And Systems For Monitoring Adverse Reactions In The United States And Germany, Two Countries With Similarly Advanced Systems For Medical Research, Testing, And Patient Care. Daemmrich Proposes That Divergent Therapeutic Cultures--the Interrelationships Among Governments, Patients, The Medical Profession, And The Pharmaceutical Industry--underlie National Differences And Explain Variations In Pharmaceutical Markets And Medical Care. daemmrich Carries The United States-germany Comparison From 1950 To The Present Through Case Studies Of Terramycin (an Antibiotic), Thalidomide (a Sedative), Propranolol (a Heart Medication), Interleukin-2 (a Cancer Therapy), And Indinavir (an Aids Drug). He Points To Different Political Constructions Of The Patient In The United States And Germany To Clarify Important Differences In Government Policies And In The Distribution Of Power Among Key Social Actors. Daemmrich Advises That International Regulatory Harmonization And Globalization In Medicine Must Retain Flexibility For Social And Political Variation Between Countries, Even As They Achieve Technical Standardization. daemmrich Uses A Comparative Study Of Pharmaceutical Regulation In The U.s. And Germany To Show That In Order For Medical Globalization To Be Successful, It Must Accommodate Persisting Social And Political Variation Even When Technical Standardization Has Been Achieved. He Looks At The Relationships Among Governments, Doctors, The Pharmaceutical Industry, And Patients In Case Studies Of An Antibiotic, A Sedative, A Heart Medication, A Cancer Therapy, And An Aids Drug. Advocates of rapid access to medicines and critics fearful of inadequate testing both argue that globalization will supersede national medical practices and result in the easy transfer of pharmaceuticals around the world. In Pharmaco-politics, Arthur Daemmrich challenges their assumptions by comparing drug laws, clinical trials, and systems for monitoring adverse reactions in the United States and Germany, two countries with similarly advanced systems for medical research, testing, and patient care. Daemmrich proposes that divergent "therapeutic cultures" -- the interrelationships among governments, patients, the medical profession, and the pharmaceutical industry -- underlie national differences and explain variations in pharmaceutical markets and medical care.Daemmrich carries the United States-Germany comparison from 1950 to the present through case studies of Terramycin (an anti-biotic), thalidomide (a sedative), propranolol (a heart medication), interleukin-2 (a cancer therapy), and indinavir (an AIDS drug). In America, regulators have delineated a strict boundary between premarket testing and market approval, while their German counterparts have adopted a more flexible approach that blurs the distinction between premarket and postmarket oversight. Testing methods in the United States are monitored by government officials; in Germany, this role is filled by medical professionals. Most striking, perhaps, is that patients in the United States increasingly challenge expert risk assessments and demand greater access to drugs, even in the early stages of clinical trials. Such features of patient activism are largely absent in Germany.In each of these areas, Daemmrich argues, different political constructions of "the patient" in the United States and Germany produce variations in government policies and in the distribution of power among key social actors. Daemmrich advises that international regulatory harmonization and globalization in medicine must retain flexibility for social and political variation between countries, even as they achieve technical standardization. "In Pharmaco-politics, Arthur Daemmrich challenges assumptions by comparing drug laws, clinical trials, and systems for monitoring adverse reactions in the United States and Germany, two countries with similarly advanced systems for medical research, testing, and patient care. Daemmrich proposes that divergent "therapeutic cultures" - the interrelationships among governments, patients, the medical profession, and the pharmaceutical industry - underlie national differences and explain variations in pharmaceutical markets and medical care."--BOOK JACKET