|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Posting date: October 11, 2005 Copyright © 2005 by Project HOPE
BiDil: Race Medicine Or Race Marketing?
1 Pamela Sankar is an assistant professor in the Department of Medical Ethics, University of Pennsylvania, in Philadelphia.
*Corresponding author.
Recent Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval of the first drug with a race-specific indication has fueled the controversy over the meaning of race and ethnicity and raised questions over whether this move should be seen as an advance or a setback in the struggle to address disparities in health status associated with race. The drug, BiDil, combines two generics long recognized as benefiting patients with heart failure, irrespective of race or ethnicity. The push to bring these drugs to market as a race-specific treatment was motivated by the peculiarities of U.S. patent law and a willingness to exploit race to gain commercial and regulatory advantage. Key Words: Business Of Health, Consumer Issues, Demography, Ethical Issues, Legal/Regulatory Issues, Minority Health, Pharmaceuticals
Related Article
This article has been cited by other articles:
Comments:Read all Comments
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||