added 2541 characters in body
Source Link
Fizz
  • 91.5k
  • 20
  • 241
  • 464

On a related note, regarding the trafficking route, see https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/44972/does-most-illegal-fentanyl-sold-in-the-us-come-through-mexicothis Skeptiks question And to quote a bit that's also relevant here from that answer; news from July this year...

The number of drug seizures involving high-purity fentanyl sent via mail from China "dropped precipitously" this year, according to Thomas Overacker, the executive director of the Office of Field Operations at U.S. Customs and Border Patrol.

Only several pounds of fentanyl have been intercepted this year at U.S. mail facilities and airports, predominantly originating from China. "Most of the illicit fentanyl" entering the country "does so at ports of entry along our southwest border," Overacker told members of a congressional subcommittee Tuesday.

[...]

The shift from China to Mexico is very recent and largely the result of successful drug control strategies implemented in the past two years.

Specifically, officials cited Beijing's decision in May to criminalize all fentanyl-related substances following U.S. pressure. The move led to a decline in the number of Chinese vendors willing to export fentanyl products, according to David Prince with Homeland Security Investigations' transnational organized crime office.

So not only could China do more, but apparently its efforts are having an effect, according to some US officials. (Why Trump is apparently still pressing China hard on this e.g. with the recent Tweets is a somewhat different matter, related to the trade war, judging by the context of the tweets.)

I should also add that not all the progress is attributed to China's sole efforts; some is credited to the improved package tracking (which China does probably contribute to, although this is not made explicit in the quote below):

As a result of requiring data on the sender, recipient and the contents of an international parcel, as well as new technology to scan packages, the postal service saw a 1,000% increase in the number of parcels seized containing synthetic opioids between 2016 and 2018. Domestically, the agency saw the number of opioid parcel seizures increase by 750% in the same timeframe.

In 2019, USPS statistics suggest that international seizures are down and domestic seizures are trending up. "This shift may suggest synthetic opioids are increasingly entering the country through means other than international mail," Chief Postal Inspector Gary Barksdale told lawmakers.

On a related note, regarding the trafficking route, see this Skeptiks question And to quote a bit that's also relevant here from that answer; news from July this year...

The number of drug seizures involving high-purity fentanyl sent via mail from China "dropped precipitously" this year, according to Thomas Overacker, the executive director of the Office of Field Operations at U.S. Customs and Border Patrol.

Only several pounds of fentanyl have been intercepted this year at U.S. mail facilities and airports, predominantly originating from China. "Most of the illicit fentanyl" entering the country "does so at ports of entry along our southwest border," Overacker told members of a congressional subcommittee Tuesday.

[...]

The shift from China to Mexico is very recent and largely the result of successful drug control strategies implemented in the past two years.

Specifically, officials cited Beijing's decision in May to criminalize all fentanyl-related substances following U.S. pressure. The move led to a decline in the number of Chinese vendors willing to export fentanyl products, according to David Prince with Homeland Security Investigations' transnational organized crime office.

So not only could China do more, but apparently its efforts are having an effect, according to some US officials. (Why Trump is apparently still pressing China hard on this e.g. with the recent Tweets is a somewhat different matter, related to the trade war, judging by the context of the tweets.)

I should also add that not all the progress is attributed to China's sole efforts; some is credited to the improved package tracking (which China does probably contribute to, although this is not made explicit in the quote below):

As a result of requiring data on the sender, recipient and the contents of an international parcel, as well as new technology to scan packages, the postal service saw a 1,000% increase in the number of parcels seized containing synthetic opioids between 2016 and 2018. Domestically, the agency saw the number of opioid parcel seizures increase by 750% in the same timeframe.

In 2019, USPS statistics suggest that international seizures are down and domestic seizures are trending up. "This shift may suggest synthetic opioids are increasingly entering the country through means other than international mail," Chief Postal Inspector Gary Barksdale told lawmakers.

added 540 characters in body
Source Link
Fizz
  • 91.5k
  • 20
  • 241
  • 464

Since my comment was deleted, I'll repeat this as a frame-challenge answer.

I watched the full 7 minutes of the boring video and I didn't see where the Senator makes this (obviously ridiculous) claim that China could stop all Fentanyl going into the US. So you seem to be setting up a straw man here.

It's also unclear what you really want to "ask" here, or actually posit:

  • China can[not] decrease corruption (if that's the ultimate cause of drug trafficking)
  • China can[not] crack down on production (any further?)
  • China can[not] regulate its (internal) precursor market better

Clearly China has been doing some of this. And some measures are pretty recent, so implementation might be not as good as it could be, e.g.

As this relates to synthetic opioids, lack of international scheduling has allowed Chinese manufacturers to export fentanyl precursors. Although they have been scheduled in the United States for a decade, N-Phenethyl-4-piperidinone (NPP) and anilino-N-phenethylpiperidine (ANPP) were not listed or subject to international controls until October 2017. In late 2016, the U.S. Department of State identified nearly 260 producers of these precursors, more than half of which were in China. These chemicals were finally scheduled in China this past February. Prior to then, there was little scrutiny on their manufacture, and producers faced little, if any, reporting, production, or exporting restrictions.

[...]

Regulatory gaps have led to a large increase in the number of unlicensed or “semi-legitimate” chemical manufacturers or distributors [in China]. There are reports that use of shell facilities and weak oversight lets some chemical and pharmaceutical manufacturers avoid scrutiny, allowing companies to produce and sell beyond their legal limits. In 2007, industry insiders estimated that uncertified chemical manufacturers produced half of the APIs [active pharmaceutical ingredients] sold in China, with most exported to foreign markets. It is unclear what proportion of uncertified manufacturers are supplying international API markets today or what amount of synthetic opioids is produced and exported via shell entities.

[...]

The division in enforcement strategy, in which the CFDA inspects only a subset of manufacturers, leaving the rest up to provincial authorities, may reflect this limitation. The CFDA and other regulators are unable to effectively inspect and police the large number of pharmaceutical manufacturers. The WHO notes that, although the CFDA is attempting to hire more inspectors, its efforts are complicated by lack of time and resources; private industry salaries are highly competitive, complicating efforts to retain qualified staff.

[...]

According to the most recent CFDA annual report, 15 firms that manufacture narcotic or psychotropic drugs, precursors, or pharmaceuticals were inspected that year; three did not pass inspection for failure to properly handle mailing and transportation certificates or failure to control samples. These numbers suggest that regulators are inspecting a small share of companies and that a sizable portion of manufacturers of controlled substances assessed in 2017 failed inspection for improper handling and transport.

That's from the very report you quoted the other stuff.

On a related note, regarding the trafficking route, see https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/44972/does-most-illegal-fentanyl-sold-in-the-us-come-through-mexico

Since my comment was deleted, I'll repeat this as a frame-challenge answer.

I watched the full 7 minutes of the boring video and I didn't see where the Senator makes this (obviously ridiculous) claim that China could stop all Fentanyl going into the US. So you seem to be setting up a straw man here.

It's also unclear what you really want to "ask" here, or actually posit:

  • China can[not] decrease corruption (if that's the ultimate cause of drug trafficking)
  • China can[not] crack down on production (any further?)
  • China can[not] regulate its (internal) precursor market better

Clearly China has been doing some of this. And some measures are pretty recent, so implementation might be not as good as it could be, e.g.

As this relates to synthetic opioids, lack of international scheduling has allowed Chinese manufacturers to export fentanyl precursors. Although they have been scheduled in the United States for a decade, N-Phenethyl-4-piperidinone (NPP) and anilino-N-phenethylpiperidine (ANPP) were not listed or subject to international controls until October 2017. In late 2016, the U.S. Department of State identified nearly 260 producers of these precursors, more than half of which were in China. These chemicals were finally scheduled in China this past February. Prior to then, there was little scrutiny on their manufacture, and producers faced little, if any, reporting, production, or exporting restrictions.

[...]

Regulatory gaps have led to a large increase in the number of unlicensed or “semi-legitimate” chemical manufacturers or distributors [in China]. There are reports that use of shell facilities and weak oversight lets some chemical and pharmaceutical manufacturers avoid scrutiny, allowing companies to produce and sell beyond their legal limits. In 2007, industry insiders estimated that uncertified chemical manufacturers produced half of the APIs [active pharmaceutical ingredients] sold in China, with most exported to foreign markets. It is unclear what proportion of uncertified manufacturers are supplying international API markets today or what amount of synthetic opioids is produced and exported via shell entities.

[...]

The division in enforcement strategy, in which the CFDA inspects only a subset of manufacturers, leaving the rest up to provincial authorities, may reflect this limitation. The CFDA and other regulators are unable to effectively inspect and police the large number of pharmaceutical manufacturers. The WHO notes that, although the CFDA is attempting to hire more inspectors, its efforts are complicated by lack of time and resources; private industry salaries are highly competitive, complicating efforts to retain qualified staff.

That's from the very report you quoted the other stuff.

On a related note, regarding the trafficking route, see https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/44972/does-most-illegal-fentanyl-sold-in-the-us-come-through-mexico

Since my comment was deleted, I'll repeat this as a frame-challenge answer.

I watched the full 7 minutes of the boring video and I didn't see where the Senator makes this (obviously ridiculous) claim that China could stop all Fentanyl going into the US. So you seem to be setting up a straw man here.

It's also unclear what you really want to "ask" here, or actually posit:

  • China can[not] decrease corruption (if that's the ultimate cause of drug trafficking)
  • China can[not] crack down on production (any further?)
  • China can[not] regulate its (internal) precursor market better

Clearly China has been doing some of this. And some measures are pretty recent, so implementation might be not as good as it could be, e.g.

As this relates to synthetic opioids, lack of international scheduling has allowed Chinese manufacturers to export fentanyl precursors. Although they have been scheduled in the United States for a decade, N-Phenethyl-4-piperidinone (NPP) and anilino-N-phenethylpiperidine (ANPP) were not listed or subject to international controls until October 2017. In late 2016, the U.S. Department of State identified nearly 260 producers of these precursors, more than half of which were in China. These chemicals were finally scheduled in China this past February. Prior to then, there was little scrutiny on their manufacture, and producers faced little, if any, reporting, production, or exporting restrictions.

[...]

Regulatory gaps have led to a large increase in the number of unlicensed or “semi-legitimate” chemical manufacturers or distributors [in China]. There are reports that use of shell facilities and weak oversight lets some chemical and pharmaceutical manufacturers avoid scrutiny, allowing companies to produce and sell beyond their legal limits. In 2007, industry insiders estimated that uncertified chemical manufacturers produced half of the APIs [active pharmaceutical ingredients] sold in China, with most exported to foreign markets. It is unclear what proportion of uncertified manufacturers are supplying international API markets today or what amount of synthetic opioids is produced and exported via shell entities.

[...]

The division in enforcement strategy, in which the CFDA inspects only a subset of manufacturers, leaving the rest up to provincial authorities, may reflect this limitation. The CFDA and other regulators are unable to effectively inspect and police the large number of pharmaceutical manufacturers. The WHO notes that, although the CFDA is attempting to hire more inspectors, its efforts are complicated by lack of time and resources; private industry salaries are highly competitive, complicating efforts to retain qualified staff.

[...]

According to the most recent CFDA annual report, 15 firms that manufacture narcotic or psychotropic drugs, precursors, or pharmaceuticals were inspected that year; three did not pass inspection for failure to properly handle mailing and transportation certificates or failure to control samples. These numbers suggest that regulators are inspecting a small share of companies and that a sizable portion of manufacturers of controlled substances assessed in 2017 failed inspection for improper handling and transport.

That's from the very report you quoted the other stuff.

On a related note, regarding the trafficking route, see https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/44972/does-most-illegal-fentanyl-sold-in-the-us-come-through-mexico

added 747 characters in body
Source Link
Fizz
  • 91.5k
  • 20
  • 241
  • 464

Since my comment was deleted, I'll repeat this as a frame-challenge answer.

I watched the full 7 minutes of the boring video and I didn't see where the Senator makes this (obviously ridiculous) claim that China could stop all Fentanyl going into the US. So you seem to be setting up a straw man here.

It's also unclear what you really want to "ask" here, or actually posit:

  • China can[not] decrease corruption (if that's the ultimate cause of drug trafficking)
  • China can[not] crack down on production (any further?)
  • China can[not] regulate its (internal) precursor market better

Clearly China has been doing some of this. And some measures are pretty recent, so implementation might be not as good as it could be, e.g.

As this relates to synthetic opioids, lack of international scheduling has allowed Chinese manufacturers to export fentanyl precursors. Although they have been scheduled in the United States for a decade, N-Phenethyl-4-piperidinone (NPP) and anilino-N-phenethylpiperidine (ANPP) were not listed or subject to international controls until October 2017. In late 2016, the U.S. Department of State identified nearly 260 producers of these precursors, more than half of which were in China. These chemicals were finally scheduled in China this past February. Prior to then, there was little scrutiny on their manufacture, and producers faced little, if any, reporting, production, or exporting restrictions.

[...]

Regulatory gaps have led to a large increase in the number of unlicensed or “semi-legitimate” chemical manufacturers or distributors [in China]. There are reports that use of shell facilities and weak oversight lets some chemical and pharmaceutical manufacturers avoid scrutiny, allowing companies to produce and sell beyond their legal limits. In 2007, industry insiders estimated that uncertified chemical manufacturers produced half of the APIs [active pharmaceutical ingredients] sold in China, with most exported to foreign markets. It is unclear what proportion of uncertified manufacturers are supplying international API markets today or what amount of synthetic opioids is produced and exported via shell entities.

[...]

The division in enforcement strategy, in which the CFDA inspects only a subset of manufacturers, leaving the rest up to provincial authorities, may reflect this limitation. The CFDA and other regulators are unable to effectively inspect and police the large number of pharmaceutical manufacturers. The WHO notes that, although the CFDA is attempting to hire more inspectors, its efforts are complicated by lack of time and resources; private industry salaries are highly competitive, complicating efforts to retain qualified staff.

That's from the very report you quoted the other stuff.

On a related note, regarding the trafficking route, see https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/44972/does-most-illegal-fentanyl-sold-in-the-us-come-through-mexico

Since my comment was deleted, I'll repeat this as a frame-challenge answer.

I watched the full 7 minutes of the boring video and I didn't see where the Senator makes this (obviously ridiculous) claim that China could stop all Fentanyl going into the US. So you seem to be setting up a straw man here.

It's also unclear what you really want to "ask" here, or actually posit:

  • China can[not] decrease corruption (if that's the ultimate cause of drug trafficking)
  • China can[not] crack down on production (any further?)
  • China can[not] regulate its (internal) precursor market better

Clearly China has been doing some of this. And some measures are pretty recent, so implementation might be not as good as it could be, e.g.

As this relates to synthetic opioids, lack of international scheduling has allowed Chinese manufacturers to export fentanyl precursors. Although they have been scheduled in the United States for a decade, N-Phenethyl-4-piperidinone (NPP) and anilino-N-phenethylpiperidine (ANPP) were not listed or subject to international controls until October 2017. In late 2016, the U.S. Department of State identified nearly 260 producers of these precursors, more than half of which were in China. These chemicals were finally scheduled in China this past February. Prior to then, there was little scrutiny on their manufacture, and producers faced little, if any, reporting, production, or exporting restrictions.

That's from the very report you quoted the other stuff.

On a related note, regarding the trafficking route, see https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/44972/does-most-illegal-fentanyl-sold-in-the-us-come-through-mexico

Since my comment was deleted, I'll repeat this as a frame-challenge answer.

I watched the full 7 minutes of the boring video and I didn't see where the Senator makes this (obviously ridiculous) claim that China could stop all Fentanyl going into the US. So you seem to be setting up a straw man here.

It's also unclear what you really want to "ask" here, or actually posit:

  • China can[not] decrease corruption (if that's the ultimate cause of drug trafficking)
  • China can[not] crack down on production (any further?)
  • China can[not] regulate its (internal) precursor market better

Clearly China has been doing some of this. And some measures are pretty recent, so implementation might be not as good as it could be, e.g.

As this relates to synthetic opioids, lack of international scheduling has allowed Chinese manufacturers to export fentanyl precursors. Although they have been scheduled in the United States for a decade, N-Phenethyl-4-piperidinone (NPP) and anilino-N-phenethylpiperidine (ANPP) were not listed or subject to international controls until October 2017. In late 2016, the U.S. Department of State identified nearly 260 producers of these precursors, more than half of which were in China. These chemicals were finally scheduled in China this past February. Prior to then, there was little scrutiny on their manufacture, and producers faced little, if any, reporting, production, or exporting restrictions.

[...]

Regulatory gaps have led to a large increase in the number of unlicensed or “semi-legitimate” chemical manufacturers or distributors [in China]. There are reports that use of shell facilities and weak oversight lets some chemical and pharmaceutical manufacturers avoid scrutiny, allowing companies to produce and sell beyond their legal limits. In 2007, industry insiders estimated that uncertified chemical manufacturers produced half of the APIs [active pharmaceutical ingredients] sold in China, with most exported to foreign markets. It is unclear what proportion of uncertified manufacturers are supplying international API markets today or what amount of synthetic opioids is produced and exported via shell entities.

[...]

The division in enforcement strategy, in which the CFDA inspects only a subset of manufacturers, leaving the rest up to provincial authorities, may reflect this limitation. The CFDA and other regulators are unable to effectively inspect and police the large number of pharmaceutical manufacturers. The WHO notes that, although the CFDA is attempting to hire more inspectors, its efforts are complicated by lack of time and resources; private industry salaries are highly competitive, complicating efforts to retain qualified staff.

That's from the very report you quoted the other stuff.

On a related note, regarding the trafficking route, see https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/44972/does-most-illegal-fentanyl-sold-in-the-us-come-through-mexico

Source Link
Fizz
  • 91.5k
  • 20
  • 241
  • 464
Loading