It is -- and remains -- immaterial to overall Merck.
That's definitive -- even so, it's not good news. Here's the Bloomberg version:
. . . .Merck & Co., which sells veterinary and farm products in more than 140 countries, will suspend sales of its livestock-feed supplement Zilmax in the U.S. and Canada after cattle taking it had trouble walking or standing.
The sales halt is temporary while the company plans a study of the drug, Whitehouse Station, New Jersey-based Merck said in a statement today. . . .
Merck is taking the action after Tyson Foods Inc. (TSN), the Springdale, Arkansas-based beef, poultry and pork producer, said on Aug. 8 that it was halting its use of Zilmax because of lame livestock found at its factories. Merck’s animal health business brought in $3.39 billion last year.
“This important step demonstrates our commitment to providing our industry partners with data that will reaffirm confidence in Zilmax,” said KJ Varma, senior vice president global R&D of the animal-health unit. “We sincerely regret that this situation creates business challenges for our customers but it is critical to ensure that this process is conducted appropriately and with rigorous scientific measures. . . .”
Of course, we will keep an eye on this.
3 comments:
I guess the same old 'everything is fine', 'we're halting the drug' leadership is still in place! Was I dreaming when they released statements just earlier this week that there wasn't anything wrong and they were, essentially, going to be retraining the customers using the additive?
It might not be material to the bottom line but it is certainly proof that Merck's leadership has any skill dealing with issues that may be evidence of earlier decisions being incorrect. First blame the customer (publicly) then throw out a mea culpa and pull back the product. Ridiculous.
I hear you -- though I think Merck's view is that the cattle producers were "overprescribing the drug", here. Zilmax adds weight, which pops the profit per head, for the producers.
But more isn't always better, for the taste/tenderness of the beef -- or the cattle's ability to walk (for example).
It is -- to my mind, anyway -- more a principled question of whether the feed additives should be used at all, than a case of a bad Merck "drug".
That said, I do agree with Whitehouse Station that it -- and FDA -- ought to study whether the producers are over-medicating the cattle.
It's not like there's a natural control point -- i.e., the doctors' prescription pad -- in this case. No doc -- no need to justify to some insurer, etc. It is a system lacking effective controls.
But that may not be primarily the fault of Merck (Intervet/legacy Schering-Plough). Just my $0.02.
I'd like to see "modified food" curtailed, just the same. Namaste -- and thanks for stopping in -- do stop back!
I agree with you, but Merck management needs to do a better job of getting their act together instead of responding and then amending their response shortly thereafter when nothing material has been presented between the two points in time.
I chuckled reading this bit from a Reuters article published on Friday: "Livestock analysts said they were surprised by Merck's decision because the company's earlier move to address concerns about Zilmax had not included a sales halt.
"They laid out a strategy in the last few days that did not include suspension," said Jim Robb, director of the Livestock Marketing Information Center."
Post a Comment