America's New War on Drugs: Should the United States Legalize Prescription Drug Reimportation;Note
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A NEW WAR ON DRUGSMany Americans in the United States are in the midst of a war on drugs.However, the enemy in this war on drugs has changed since President Ronald Reagan started the social crusade in the 1980's.For millions of Americans, the pharmaceutical companies, and the high price of their prescription drugs, are the enemy.The weapon many Americans brandish?Increasingly, they fight the cost of prescription drugs through methods of reimportation.Reimportation takes many forms.An estimated one million Americans cross the border into Canada each year to purchase a few months' supply of prescription drugs at prices not found in the United States. 1 Many others gain access to foreign pharmaceuticals through the Internet.2 Some take advantage of a growing number of strip mall storefronts like Rx Depot, which sell imported Canadian drugs at Canadian prices across the United States.3 All of these forms seek to combat the rising costs of pharmaceuticals by obtaining prescription drugs from markets outside the United States.This Note first discusses the history of high prescription drug prices in the United States compared to foreign countries.It then analyzes the proposed plan to permit reimportation of prescription drugs from foreign markets such as Canada, addressing the economic strengths and weaknesses as well as the safety issues present in a reimportation plan.Finally, it concludes that recent congressional efforts to implement reimportation must address the safety concerns used to defeat such plans, work to restrict direct-to-consumer advertising, and spread the research and development burden * J.D. Candidate, Notre Dame Law School, 2005; B.A., University of Notre Dame, 2002.The author would like to thank Andy Villier and the rest of the Journal of Legislation for their feedback on this Note.He extends great gratitude to his wife, Elizabeth S
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.059 | 0.030 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.006 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".