SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
For Immediate Release
February, 18 2019, 11:00pm EDT
Contact:
Amanda Kistler, Communications Director, CIEL: +1.202.742.5832, akistler@ciel.org
New Report Reveals Plastic Threatens Human Health on a Global Scale
WASHINGTON
A new report released today reveals that plastic is a human health crisis hiding in plain sight. Plastic & Health: The Hidden Costs of a Plastic Planet, authored by the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL), Earthworks, Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives (GAIA), Healthy Babies Bright Futures (HBBF), IPEN, Texas Environmental Justice Advocacy Services (t.e.j.a.s.), University of Exeter, and UPSTREAM, brings together research that exposes the distinct toxic risks plastic poses to human health at every stage of the plastic lifecycle, from extraction of fossil fuels, to consumer use, to disposal and beyond.
To date, research into the human health impacts of plastic have focused narrowly on specific moments in the plastic lifecycle, often on single products, processes, or exposure pathways. This approach fails to recognize that significant, complex, and intersecting human health impacts occur at every stage of the plastic lifecycle: from wellhead to refinery, from store shelves to human bodies, and from waste management to ongoing impacts of microplastics in the air, water, and soil. Plastic & Health presents the full panorama of human health impacts of plastic and counsels that any solution to the plastic crisis must address the full lifecycle.
According to the report, uncertainties and knowledge gaps often impede regulation and the ability of consumers, communities, and policymakers to make informed decisions. However, the full scale of health impacts throughout plastic's lifecycle are overwhelming and warrant a precautionary approach.
KEY FINDINGS
Plastic requires a lifecycle approach. The narrow approaches to assessing and addressing plastic impacts to date are inadequate and inappropriate. Making informed decisions that address plastic risks demands a full lifecycle approach to understand the full scope of its toxic impacts on human health. Likewise, reducing toxic exposure to plastic will require a variety of solutions and options because plastic has a complex lifecycle with a diverse universe of actors.
At every stage of its lifecycle, plastic poses distinct risks to human health, arising from both exposure to plastic particles themselves and associated chemicals. People worldwide are exposed at multiple stages of this lifecycle.
- Extraction and transportation of fossil feedstocks for plastic, which releases an array of toxic substances into the air and water, including those with known health impacts like cancer, neurotoxicity, reproductive and developmental toxicity, and impairment of the immune system;
- Refining and production of plastic resins and additives, which releases carcinogenic and other highly toxic substances into the air, with effects including impairment of the nervous system, reproductive and developmental problems, cancer, leukemia, and genetic impacts like low birth weight;
- Consumer products and packaging, which can lead to ingestion and/or inhalation of microplastic particles and hundreds of toxic substances;
- Plastic waste management, especially "waste-to-energy" and other forms of incineration, releases toxic substances including heavy metals such as lead and mercury, acid gases and particulate matter, which can enter air, water, and soil causing both direct and indirect health risks for workers and nearby communities;
- Fragmenting and microplastics, which enter the human body directly and lead to an array of health impacts (including inflammation, genotoxicity, oxidative stress, apoptosis, and necrosis) that are linked to negative health outcomes ranging from cardiovascular disease to cancer and autoimmune conditions;
- Cascading exposure as plastic degrades, which further leach toxic chemicals concentrated in plastic into the environment and human bodies; and
- Ongoing environmental exposures as plastic contaminates and accumulates in food chains through agricultural soils, terrestrial and aquatic food chains, and the water supply, creating new opportunities for human exposure.
FROM THE AUTHORS
David Azoulay, Director of Environmental Health, CIEL
"From wellhead to refinery, and from kitchen shelves to water supplies, this report reveals how plastic poses toxic risks at every stage of its lifecycle. There is no silver bullet to solve this health crisis, but all solutions must ultimately reduce the production and use of plastic if they are serious about protecting human health.
"Both the supply chains and the impacts of plastic cross and re-cross borders, continents, and oceans. No country can effectively protect its citizens from those impacts on its own, and no global instrument exists today to fully address the toxic lifecycle of plastics. Countries must seize the opportunity of current global discussions to develop a holistic response to the plastic health crisis that involves reducing the production, use, and disposal of plastic worldwide."
Priscilla Villa, Earthworks
"Plastics poison people before they're ever used because they're produced at polluting petrochemical plants. And those plastics are made from fracking byproducts. This is a problem because oil and gas extraction and transport releases carcinogens like benzene. Any solution to our plastics problem must prioritize people's health ahead of Big Oil's profits."
Doun Moon, Research Associate, GAIA
"Plastic waste does not only pollute our oceans. Burning plastic in incinerators turns one form of pollution into another, whether it be air emissions, toxic ash, or wastewater. People living nearby incinerators are primarily low income communities and people of color, and bear the brunt of this toxic pollution. We can't burn our plastic problem away, leaving certain communities to suffer the consequences. We desperately need to turn off the plastic tap and build a more just and equitable society in the process."
Dr. Mariann Lloyd-Smith, Senior Policy Advisor, IPEN
"The twin crises of chemical and plastics pollution are decimating our oceans and its inhabitants. Plastics are not just unsightly litter, they are made with many toxic ingredients and collect many more persistent poisons over their incredibly long life time. Microplastics provide a pathway for hazardous chemicals into the marine foodchain on which humans depend. We can't dump, burn, or recycle our way out of this problem; it's time for industry and governments to turn off this toxic tap and for all of us to make deep changes in the way we live."
Lauren Moore, UPSTREAM
"What's toxic for the planet is just as toxic for human health. Why risk exposing our bodies to the thousands of chemicals found in plastic packaging when we have reusable options that do not pollute our health or the environment? When it comes to the safety of our families and our planet, reuse wins every time."
Von Hernandez, Global Coordinator, Break Free From Plastic Movement (BFFP)
"The heavy toxic burdens associated with plastic - at every stage of its life cycle - offers another convincing argument why reducing and not increasing production of plastics is the only way forward. It is shocking how the existing regulatory regime continues to give the whole plastic industrial complex, the license to play Russian roulette with our lives and our health. Plastic is lethal, and this report shows us why."
WHAT EXPERTS ARE SAYING ABOUT PLASTIC & HEALTH:
Ruthann Rudel, Director of Research, Silent Spring Institute
"Plastics are made of a complex mix of chemicals, many of them are endocrine disruptors or are of concern for other health effects. A recent National Academy of Sciences report found that the important vinyl ingredient DEHP is "a presumed hazard to human reproduction" at current exposures, and that's just one plastics ingredient! Plastics also contain many toxic additives, such as flame retardants, metals, anti-microbials, non-stick coatings, and more. The fantasy that plastics are an inexpensive material is just that - a fantasy that fails to acknowledge the tremendous costs we all pay."
Erica Jackson, Community Outreach & Communications Specialist, FracTracker Alliance
"The pervasiveness of plastic is a problem that spans space and time- it's all around us and it lasts for centuries. Therefore, the importance of this assessment of plastic's cumulative health impact cannot be understated. We know enough to justify taking immediate action to reduce our dependence on plastic, and that starts by keeping plastic feedstocks - oil and gas - in the ground."
Graham Forbes, Greenpeace Global Plastics Project Leader
"The health risks of the plastic pollution crisis have been ignored for far too long, and must be at the forefront of all decisions on plastics moving forward. Corporations and governments are risking our health to maintain the status quo and keep profits flowing. It's not just our oceans and marine animals that are suffering from this addiction to plastics, it's all of us. While there is still much to learn about all of the impacts of plastics on human health, we know enough to adopt a precautionary principle and start to phase out these throwaway plastics for good."
Mike Schade, Mind the Store Campaign Director, Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families
"The plastics industry is polluting the planet with poisonous chemicals like phthalates and halogenated flame retardants, which are commonly found in products like food packaging and electronics. Even babies are being born pre-polluted with these unnecessary dangerous chemicals. At a time when we are learning more about the dangers of chemicals such as these in plastics, the US federal government is rolling back critical environmental and public health safeguards. Big retailers must step up to drive toxic chemicals out of plastics and act swiftly to phase out the worst plastics of concern like PVC, the poison plastic."
Julie Teel Simmonds, Senior Attorney, Center for Biological Diversity
"It is alarming that the fossil fuel industry plans to increase plastic production by 40 percent over the next decade. Making plastic pollutes communities, and plastic trash is filling our oceans. It is clear that curbing plastic pollution and protecting public health cannot be achieved without curbing plastic production."
Stiv Wilson, Campaigns Director, Story of Stuff Project
"For years the petrochemical industry has ignored the upstream human health impacts in the extraction and refining process. Instead, they've chosen to frame the human health question narrowly, after plastic gets to the ocean where the science is a bit less smoking gun. Finally, we have a baseline for understanding the whole pollution matrix that surrounds this ubiquitous material called plastic."
ABOUT THE AUTHORING ORGANIZATIONS:
Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) uses the power of law to protect the environment, promote human rights, and ensure a just and sustainable society. CIEL seeks a world where the law reflects the interconnection between humans and the environment, respects the limits of the planet, protects the dignity and equality of each person, and encourages all of earth's inhabitants to live in balance with each other.
Earthworks is a nonprofit organization dedicated to protecting communities and the environment from the adverse impacts of mineral and energy development while promoting sustainable solutions.
Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives (GAIA) is a worldwide alliance of more than 800 grassroots groups, non-governmental organizations, and individuals in over 90 countries whose ultimate vision is a just, toxic-free world without incineration.
Healthy Babies Bright Futures (HBBF) is an alliance of nonprofit organizations, scientists and donors that designs and implements outcomes-based programs to measurably reduce babies' exposures to toxic chemicals in the first 1,000 days of development. HBBF brings together the strongest and latest science, data analysis, critical thinking, performance measurement, campaign talent, communications skills and commitment to collaboration.
IPEN brings together leading public interest groups working on environmental and public health issues in over 100 countries to take action internationally to minimize and, whenever possible, eliminate hazardous, toxic chemicals.
Texas Environmental Justice Advocacy Services (t.e.j.a.s.) is dedicated to providing community members with the tools necessary to create sustainable, environmentally healthy communities by educating individuals on health concerns and implications arising from environmental pollution, empowering individuals with an understanding of applicable environmental laws and regulations and promoting their enforcement, and offering community building skills and resources for effective community action and greater public participation.
UPSTREAM sparks innovative solutions to plastic pollution and brings people together to transform our throw-away society to a culture of stewardship. UPSTREAM envisions a world without plastic pollution and empowers business, community, and people to imagine and co-create this future with us.
Read the full report here.
Read the executive summary here.
Find this press release online here.
Since 1989, the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) has worked to strengthen and use international law and institutions to protect the environment, promote human health, and ensure a just and sustainable society.
LATEST NEWS
Israeli Assault on Gaza, West Bank Continues in 'Final Stage' of Cease-Fire Talks
"As a cease-fire in Gaza is near, Israel is expanding its assault on the West Bank," said one expert. "It was always a war on Palestinian existence."
Jan 14, 2025
As negotiators in Qatar navigated the " final stage" of a cease-fire agreement to end the U.S.-backed Israeli assault on the Gaza Strip, Israel's forces on Tuesday continued to kill Palestinians in the besieged coastal enclave and the illegally occupied West Bank.
Since the Hamas-led October 7, 2023 attack, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) have killed at least 46,645 Palestinians in Gaza and wounded 110,012, with over 10,000 others missing, health officials said Tuesday. The true death toll could be much higher. A peer-reviewed analysis published last week in The Lancetfound that the official tally through last June was likely a 41% undercount.
The Palestinian National Authority's news agency WAFA reported Tuesday that IDF shelling killed at least two civilians at the Nuseirat refugee camp and a correspondent in Gaza City "said that Israeli warplanes fired missiles at a house in the Sheikh Radwan neighborhood, north of Gaza City, and another house in the Manara neighborhood, south of Khan Younis City, killing several civilians and injuring others."
According to multiple media outlets, Israeli forces also killed at least 13 people in an attack on a home in Deir al-Balah.
Israel faces a genocide case at the International Court of Justice over its assault on Gaza and in November the International Criminal Court issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his former defense minister, Yoav Gallant, as well as Hamas leader Mohammed Diab Ibrahim Al-Masri.
In addition to waging war on Gaza over the past 15 months, Israel has stepped up its military activity in the West Bank—where a Tuesday strike on the Jenin refugee camp killed at least six Palestinians and wounded several others. The Times of Israelreported that "the IDF said it carried out the strike in a joint operation with the Shin Bet, without immediately providing further information."
The Israeli newspaper also noted that "on Tuesday evening, as on many previous Tuesday nights, thousands gather for a unity rally of prayer and song held in Tel Aviv's Hostages Square," while hundreds of right-wing demonstrators blocked "an intersection in central Jerusalem, in protest of the ongoing hostage negotiations between Israel and Hamas."
According to a draft obtained by The Associated Press, the first part of the three-stage deal would involve a halt to the fighting, both sides releasing captives, displaced Palestinians in Gaza returning home, and more humanitarian aid entering the strip.
Phase two would feature a declaration of "sustainable calm" and Hamas freeing more hostages in exchange for additional Palestinian prisoners and the full withdrawal of Israeli troops from Gaza, AP reported. The third part would include an exchange of bodies, a reconstruction plan for the strip—where civilian infrastructure is in ruins—and the reopening of border crossings.
"The terms of the deal being negotiated are largely consistent with what was on the table last May when outgoing President Joe Biden first announced it. Biden allowed Netanyahu to steamroll him for months—rewarding Israel with billions of dollars in arms transfers and political support after rejecting that cease-fire deal," Jeremy Scahill detailed at Drop Site News.
The latest cease-fire talks come as U.S. President-elect Donald Trump prepares for his inauguration next Monday. The Republican has been pushing for a resolution to Israel's assault on Gaza—or at least an appearance of one—before he returns to office.
"The fact that Trump emerged as the decisive player in pushing a potential cease-fire forward is evidence that Biden never used the full powers available to a sitting U.S. president to seal the deal in the summer," wrote Scahill. "While Trump has publicly repeated his threat that he will 'unleash hell' on Hamas if the Israeli hostages are not freed, his pressure has not been solely focused on Hamas; Trump and his aides have made clear to Netanyahu that the president-elect expects Israel to comply with his demands, too."
Netanyahu on Tuesday told hostages' families that "he is willing to agree to a prolonged cease-fire Gaza in exchange for their return," according toHaaretz. Later Tuesday, The Times of Israelreported that the prime minister was meeting with "Israel's hostage negotiation team and with members of Israel's security establishment," and expected negotiations to go through the night.
Even if a deal is reached regarding Gaza, some experts fear the bloodshed will continue there and in the West Bank
"There will possibly be an end to the Gaza war, but there will be now another war in the West Bank," Sami Al-Arian, a Palestinian analyst and director of the Center for Islam and Global Affairs at Istanbul Zaim University, told Scahill. "It may not be on the same scale, but it would be as vicious from the settlers, from the Netanyahu government."
Gazan writer and analyst Muhammad Shehada wrote for the U.S.-based Center for International Policy last week that a senior Arab official told him the U.S. president-elect asked the Qataris and Egyptians to finalize a deal before he takes office but the Israeli prime minister "is not budging while at the same time issuing false positive statements of a breakthrough and progress to buy time and pretend to seek a deal until Trump is in office, where Netanyahu can trade the Gaza war for something big in the West Bank."
Sharing on social media a video of the Tuesday strike on Jenin, Middle East expert Assal Rad said that "as a cease-fire in Gaza is near, Israel is expanding its assault on the West Bank. The Gaza genocide is only the most recent atrocity Israel—with the help of the U.S.—has carried out against Palestinians. The same story for 77+ years. It was always a war on Palestinian existence."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Far Too Little, Far Too Late,' Say Critics as Biden Finally Removes Cuba From Terror List
"Seriously? You wait until six days before leaving office to do what you promised to do during your 2020 campaign?" said one observer.
Jan 14, 2025
In a move likely to be reversed by the incoming Trump administration, President Joe Biden on Tuesday notified Congress of his intent to remove Cuba from the U.S. State Sponsors of Terrorism list, a designation that critics have long condemned as politically motivated and meritless.
Noting that "the government of Cuba has not provided any support for international terrorism" and has "provided assurances" that it will not do so in the future, the White House said in a memo that the Biden administration is moving to rescind the first Trump administration's January 2021 addition of Cuba to the State Sponsors of Terrorism (SSOT) list and take other measures to ease some sanctions on the long-suffering island of 11 million inhabitants.
Cuba's SSOT designation was based mostly on the socialist nation's harboring of leftist Colombian rebels and several U.S. fugitives from justice for alleged crimes committed decades ago, even though no other country has been placed on the SSOT list for such a reason and despite right-wing Cuban exile terrorists enjoying citizenship—and even heroic status—in the United States.
"Despite its limited nature, it is a decision in the right direction and in line with the sustained and firm demand of the government and people of Cuba, and with the broad, emphatic, and repeated call of many governments, especially Latin America and the Caribbean, of Cubans living abroad, political, religious and social organizations, and numerous political figures from the United States and other countries," the Cuban Ministry of Foreign Affairs said in a statement.
"It is important to note that the economic blockade and much of the dozen coercive measures that have been put into effect since 2017 remain in force to strengthen it, with full extraterritorial effect and in violation of international law and human rights of all Cubans," the ministry added.
For 32 straight years, the United Nations General Assembly has overwhelmingly voted for resolutions condemning the U.S. blockade of Cuba. And for 32 years, the United States, usually along with a small handful of countries, has opposed the measures. Last year's vote was 187-2, with Israel joining the U.S. in voting against the resolution.
Cuba followed Biden's move by announcing it would "gradually" release 553 political prisoners following negotiations with the Catholic Church, The New York Timesreported.
Many progressives welcomed Biden's shift. Congresswoman Nydia Velázquez (D-N.Y.) said in a statement that Cuba's SSOT designation "has only worsened life for the Cuban people without advancing U.S. interests" and "has made it harder for Cubans to access humanitarian aid, banking services, and the ability to travel abroad."
"It has also deepened food and medicine shortages and worsened the island's energy crisis, especially after Hurricane Rafael," she added. "These hardships have driven an unprecedented wave of migration, leading to the largest exodus in Cuba's history."
Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) called Biden's move "a long overdue action that will help normalize relations with our neighbor."
"This is a step toward ending decades of failed policy that has only hurt Cuban families and strained diplomatic ties," Omar added. "Removing this designation will help the people of Cuba and create new opportunities for trade and cooperation between our nations. I look forward to continuing the work to build bridges between our countries and supporting policies that benefit both the American and Cuban people."
David Adler, the co-general coordinator at Progressive International, called the delisting "far too little, far too late."
"POTUS removing Cuba's SSOT designation in the final days of his presidency only means one thing: He knew—from day one—that the designation was simply an excuse to punish the Cuban people," Adler added. "But he maintained it anyway. Sickening."
The peace group CodePink released a statement welcoming Biden's shift, but adding that "it is unacceptable that it took this administration four years to address these injustices."
"President Biden made the inhumane decision every single day to not alleviate the suffering of millions of Cubans by keeping this designation in place," the group added. "As we mark this overdue progress, we can only hope that the Trump administration does not reverse these crucial steps towards justice and diplomacy."
Trump's nominee for secretary of state, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) is the son of Cuban immigrants and a fierce critic of Cuba's socialist government. In 2021, Rubio introduced legislation aimed at blocking Cuba's removal from the SSOT list. Trump has also tapped Mauricio Claver-Carone—a staunch supporter of sanctioning Cuba—as his special envoy for Latin America.
Alex Main, director of international policy at the Center for Economic and Policy Research, said Tuesday that "while this decision, which comes years after 80 members of Congress urged Biden to reverse Trump's 'total pressure' approach should have been made long ago, it is better late than never."
"Sixty years of failed policy should be more than enough, and hopefully the new administration will have the wisdom and the courage to pursue a new course, one that's in the best interest of both the U.S. and the Cuban people," Main added.
Cuba was first placed on the SSOT list by the Reagan administration in 1982 amid an ongoing, decadeslong campaign of U.S.-backed exile terrorism, attempted subversion, failed assassination attempts, economic warfare, and covert operations large and small in a futile effort to overthrow the revolutionary government of longtime leader Fidel Castro. Cuba says U.S.-backed terrorism has killed or wounded more than 5,000 Cubans and cost its economy billions of dollars.
In stark contrast, Cuba has not committed any terrorism against the United States.
Former President Barack Obama removed Cuba from the SSOT in 2015 during a promising but ultimately short-lived rapprochement between the two countries that abruptly ended when Trump took office for the first time in 2017.
"Cuba will continue to confront and denounce this policy of economic war, the interference programs, and the disinformation and discredit operations financed each year with tens of millions of dollars from the United States federal budget," the Cuban Foreign Ministry said Tuesday. "It will also remain ready to develop a relationship of respect with that country, based on dialogue and noninterference in the internal affairs of both, despite differences."
Keep ReadingShow Less
FTC Report Shows Big Pharma Middlemen Jack Up Prices by Up to 7,736%
Pharmacy benefit managers "are raking in billions in excess revenue—$7.3 billion over just five years—while squeezing independent pharmacies and leaving patients and health plan sponsors with skyrocketing costs."
Jan 14, 2025
The U.S. Federal Trade Commission on Tuesday published the second part of its investigation into how prescription drug middlemen are marking up the prices of specialty generic drugs dispensed at their affiliated pharmacies by hundreds—and in some cases, thousands—of percent, underscoring what advocates say is the need for urgent action by policymakers.
The FTC's second interim staff report on consolidated pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) found that the three largest of these middlemen—CVS Health's Caremark Rx, Cigna Group's Express Scripts, and UnitedHealth Group's OptumRx—"marked up two specialty generic cancer drugs by thousands of percent and then paid their affiliated pharmacies hundreds of millions of dollars of dispensing revenue in excess of estimated acquisition costs for each drug annually."
"Of the specialty generic drugs analyzed in this report and dispensed by the 'Big Three' PBMs' affiliated pharmacies for commercial health plan members between 2020 and 2022, 63% were reimbursed at rates marked up by more than 100% over their estimated acquisition cost... while 22% were marked up by more than 1,000%," the report states.
"For the pulmonary hypertension drug tadalafil (generic Adcirca), for example, pharmacies purchased the drug at an average of $27 in 2022, yet the Big Three PBMs marked up the drug by $2,079 and paid their affiliated pharmacies $2,106, on average, for a 30-day supply of the medication on commercial claims," the publication notes. That's a staggering average markup of 7,736%.
"The FTC's second interim report lays bare the blatant profiteering by PBM giants."
"Such significant markups allowed the Big Three PBMs and their affiliated specialty pharmacies to generate more than $7.3 billion in revenue from dispensing drugs in excess of the drugs' estimated acquisition costs from 2017-22," the FTC said. "The Big Three PBMs netted such significant revenues all while patient, employer, and other healthcare plan sponsor payments for drugs steadily increased annually."
The new analysis follows a July 2024 report that revealed Big Three PBM-affiliated pharmacies received 68% of the dispensing revenue generated by specialty drugs in 2023, a 14% increase from 2016.
"The FTC staff's second interim report finds that the three major pharmacy benefit managers hiked costs for a wide range of lifesaving drugs, including medications to treat heart disease and cancer," FTC Chair Lina Khan said in a statement Tuesday. "The FTC should keep using its tools to investigate practices that may inflate drug costs, squeeze independent pharmacies, and deprive Americans of affordable, accessible healthcare—and should act swiftly to stop any illegal conduct."
Khan's time as chair is limited. Republican U.S. President-elect Donald Trump's inauguration is next week and he has named Andrew Ferguson as the next FTC chair. As Ferguson is already on the commission, his elevation to chair won't require Senate confirmation.
Greg Lopes, spokesperson for the Pharmaceutical Care Management Association, a PBM lobby group, said Tuesday that "it's clear this report again fails to consider the entirety of the prescription drug supply chain and makes sweeping assertions about the role of PBMs disconnected from a full appreciation of their critical cost-saving role for employers, unions, taxpayers, and patients."
Last September, the FTC sued the Big Three and their affiliated group purchasing organizations for allegedly "engaging in anticompetitive and unfair rebating practices that have artificially inflated the list price of insulin drugs, impaired patients' access to lower list price products, and shifted the cost of high insulin list prices to vulnerable patients."
FTC Office of Policy Planning Director Hannah Garden-Monheit said Tuesday that the problem of PBM price inflation "is growing at an alarming rate, which means there is an urgent need for policymakers to address it."
To that end, U.S. Sens. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) and Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) introduced the Pharmacy Benefit Manager Transparency Act of 2023, a bill backed by the AARP aimed at increasing transparency and "holding PBMs accountable for deceptive and unfair practices that drive up prescription drug costs and force independent pharmacies out of business."
"This report is a call to action for policymakers to dismantle these exploitative schemes."
Responding to the FTC report, Emma Freer, senior policy analyst for healthcare at the American Economic Liberties Project—a corporate accountability and antitrust advocacy group—said in a statement Tuesday that "the FTC's second interim report lays bare the blatant profiteering by PBM giants, which are marking up lifesaving drugs like cancer, HIV, and multiple sclerosis treatments by thousands of percent and forcing patients to pay the price."
"By steering prescriptions for the most expensive specialty generic drugs to their own pharmacies, PBMs are raking in billions in excess revenue—$7.3 billion over just five years—while squeezing independent pharmacies and leaving patients and health plan sponsors with skyrocketing costs," Freer added. "This report is a call to action for policymakers to dismantle these exploitative schemes, outlaw the rebate system driving up prices, and restore fairness and affordability to the U.S. healthcare system."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular