Lies, Damn Lies, and Press Releases

by Patricia Green, published on Dec. 21, 2006 by MedsAbroad.com

Recently, AccountingWEB.com published an article (author unknown), in which it touts the services of one Canadian drugstore, and claims that seniors would do better ordering their prescriptions from Canada rather than participating in the Medicare Part D program. We found several holes in their arguments. Here they are.

1. They say that it is now legal to order meds from Canada. False. It is still illegal, but it is not being enforced. People who buy drugs from Canada are, technically, breaking the law. Their parcels can still be interdicted, and a few still are because Customs & Border Control must search a certain number of parcels coming from overseas drugstores and suppliers looking for counterfeit drugs.
2. The study mentioned in the article was done by Concord Drugstore, a Canadian company. Any study which goes forward to find that the primary author of the study is the best choice, is suspect. Furthermore, there is no link to the study given. Where is it published? How can it be verified? Was it reviewed by anyone not associated with a Canadian drug store?
3. "…money is saved in every instance by ordering from Canada." This is simply not possible. Generic drugs are frequently more expensive in Canada, so this statement is purely fantasy. If a consumer chooses a slate of purely generic drugs, their cost will almost certainly be higher from any Canadian drugs store than from a carefully chosen US one. (And don't forget the shipping costs!)
4. "The largest savings that an average patient can expect is $1650 per year by buying from Canada." What, exactly, does the "average patient" take? We want to check these numbers. Did AccountingWEB check them? They're not saying. Did they republish a Press Release from Concord Drugstore, or what?
5. The article refers to Medicare Part D having "higher monthly premiums" in 2007, and yet the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services says, "Among the illustrative beneficiaries in this study ["Medicare Drug Coverage Continues to Provide Significant Discounts and Savings in 2007"], the median increase in annual costs in 2007 is less than 2 percent relative to 2006. In many instances, beneficiaries' annual costs will actually be lower in 2007." Furthermore, premiums for 2007 average exactly the same as in 2006, $24 per month. We fail to see how this is "higher monthly premiums" as stated in the article. Here's a quote directly from the Center for Medicare & Medicaid Services confirming this point: "Competition and choice have resulted in the average monthly premium of $24 for 2007, the same as in 2006, and 83 percent of beneficiaries with stand-alone prescription drug plans will have access to plans that cost less than their current coverage."
6. Finally, the fact is that polls show that over 80% of Medicare Part D recipients are happy with their current plan and coverage. They like being law-abiding citizens, certain of the drugs they buy in the US, and confident that their Medicare Part D coverage is giving them a reasonable discount on the drugs they need.

We don't know why AccountingWEB has published a polished-up Press Release for a Canadian drugstore under the guise of an article. If AccountingWEB dislikes Medicare Part D, they should say so honestly (as we have, many times), and not throw a lot of incorrect information out instead. This shows no integrity at all and AccountingWEB should be ashamed.

Return to list of articles by Patricia Green