| advertise add site services publishers database health videos | ![]() | about toolbar stats live show health store more stuff JOIN/LOGIN |
Vaccines, Pandemic Vaccines, Vaccine Clinical Trials, Medical Research,... coastalcarolinaresearch.c... | Antiviral, Drug Development and Vaccine Development - SIGA Human siga.com |
The Biodefense and Pandemic Vaccine and Drug Development Act of 2005 (S. 1873), nicknamed "Bioshield Two" and sponsored by Senator Richard Burr (R-North Carolina), aims to shortcut safety testing for new vaccines and drugs in case of a pandemic, and to protect vaccine makers and the pharmaceutical industry from legal liability for vaccine injuries.[neutrality disputed] The proposed bill would create a new federal agency, the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Agency (BARDA), that would act "as the single point of authority" to promote advanced research and development of drugs and vaccines in response to bioterrorism and natural disease outbreaks, while shielding the agency from public Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests. BARDA would be exempt from long-standing open records and meetings laws that apply to most government departments. The Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee approved the bill, co-sponsored by Bill Frist (R-TN), Mike Enzi (R-WY), and Judd Gregg (R-NH), by voice vote, despite Democratic objections.
[edit] Key provisionsThe Bioshield Two bill would shift the main responsibility for developing bioterrorism countermeasures out of the Department of Homeland Security and into the new BARDA agency within the Department of Health and Human Services. The proposed new agency would improve on Project BioShield, a barely two-year-old program also meant to encourage production of vaccines and drugs. BARDA would receive a first-year budget of $1 billion. Other key aspects of the proposed legislation include:
[edit] SupportMuch of the support for the bill comes from Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA) and its members.[citation needed] In the 2002 election cycle, PhRMA contributed $3,505,052 to politicians, with 95% going to Republicans. The top recipient in the Senate was the bill's sponsor, Senator Richard Burr, who received $288,684, according to the non-partisan Center for Responsive Politics.[citation needed] Senator Burr said the legislation "creates a true partnership" between the federal government, the pharmaceutical industry and academia to "walk the drug companies through the Valley of Death" in bringing a new vaccine or drug to market. Exemptions from open records and meetings laws would streamline the development process, safeguard national security and protect the proprietary interests of drug companies, say Republican backers of the bill.[1] [edit] OppositionSenator Chris Dodd (D-Connecticut) said "Their plan will protect companies that make ineffective or harmful medicines, and because it does not include compensation for those injured by a vaccine or drug, it will discourage first responders and patients from taking medicines to counter a biological attack or disease outbreak."[2] [edit] See alsoOther proposals that also contained, in part, similar provisions (or protections) as those found in the Biodefense and Pandemic Vaccine and Drug Development Act of 2005 [3] [edit] References
[edit] External links
|
| ↑ top of page ↑ | about thumbshots |