Ken McLeod , I 3 15 March 2011 TO: THE TRANSPARANCY REVIEW PANEL:
[email protected] THERAPEUTIC GOODS ADMINISTRATION • Dear Professor Pearce Re: TGA Review: "Getting Information about Medicines and Medical Devices Made Easier" I refer to the Review of the TGA currently being conducted, and that I notice that I might have missed the date for final submissions. I request that this submission be accepted, as it relates to a matter of public importance; that is the implied endorsement of dangerous and ineffective medical devices by the TGA. I note that the Parliamentary Secretary for Health and Ageing, Catherine King, has announced that, "It is now easy for consumers to find 0 product name and the ingredients, de toils about the company, the date a product was approved for use in Australia and importantly any warningsabout the use of the product." 1 .1 read a recent report by Choice magazine on pharmacies. 2 That prompted me to go my local pharmacy last week, and what did I find? Ear candles! I was surprised to see that medical devices that are known to be dangerous and ineffective are on sale at a pharmacy which is part of a national chain, and is supposed to abide by the Pharmacy Guild's Code of Conduct. In fact, "surprised" does not cover my reaction; I was disgusted, horrified, and angry that these gadgets could be on sale legally. I was even more surprised, disgusted, horrified, and angry that these gadgets carried an ARTG number. To the innocent bystander, an ARTG number implies an endorsement from the TGA, after supposedly passing tests for safety and efficacy.