For the past 10 years, the drug Tamiflu has been the last line of defence against flu complications. During the menagerie of flu outbreaks (swine, bird) and SARS, the Canadian government spent $77 million on Tamiflu. The rest of the world spent about $9 billion.
The idea is the drug could cut down on the duration and severity of the flu and in more serious outbreaks, save many lives.
Canada largely based their decision to stockpile nearly 20 million doses of the antiviral on industry-funded research.
But a new report suggests the drug has far fewer benefits than thought.
Tamiflu shortens symptoms by about half a day - the same as Tylenol - according to research from the Cochrane Collaboration, a nonprofit research network. The antiviral doesn't lessen a patient's chances of winding up in a hospital. In children, the drug was found to be almost entirely ineffective.
Much of that information came from clinical studies from the drug manufacturer that rarely gets shared with regulators. The Cochrane group only obtained that after a long and hard-fought battle.
So far, however, Canadian health officials have been largely resistant to change in the face of science. Doing something has been seen as better than doing nothing.
But $77 million is a lot to spend on a very limited benefit.
The Tamiflu case highlights the need for greater transparency in data used to assess drugs to begin with, so real costs and benefits can be weighed.
