MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2602708680

Deadly Discounts: How Reimportation Jeopardizes the Safety of the U.S. Pharmaceutical Drug Supply under the Federal Trade Commission Amendment

2005· article· en· W2602708680 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nicole C. Bates

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicLegal and Constitutional Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCommissionBusinessAmendmentLawPolitical scienceFinance
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The amendment to a Federal Trade Commission (FTC) reauthorization bill, previously introduced as Senate Bill 334 (S.334) Pharmaceutical Market Access and Drug Safety Act of 2005 allows for the reimportation of prescription drugs into the United States from approximately 25 countries, including Canada via Internet pharmacies. There are no guarantees that the internet websites advertising as Canadian pharmacies are legitimate. The shipping of pharmaceutical drugs occurs through importation, which refers to drugs produced abroad then later shipped to the U.S., or re-importation, a term applied when drugs are produced in the U.S. and exported for sale to foreign countries and later imported back into the U.S.\nThe amendment attempts to open the border doors even further by allowing increased importation of medicine and requires pharmacies and drug wholesalers to register with the FDA. The potential importers will be subject to frequent, random inspection; however, these inspections are inadequate and more must be done. Some real solutions include electronic pedigrees and authentication technologies. Also, technology must be rotated so that illegitimate manufacturers can not adapt and overcome anti-counterfeiting measures.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.939
Threshold uncertainty score0.486

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.214 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicLegal and Constitutional StudiesFrench-language works237,207