W140 N9504 Fountain Blvd.
Menomonee Falls, WI  53051

Local: 262.255.6150
Toll Free: 800.444.5144
ATL Home
ATL

Donfucius Says: February 3rd, 2012. Random Bits Of Wisdom.

  1. “Since light travels faster than sound, isn’t that why some people appear bright until you hear them speak?” — Patti Molloy
  2. “Preach the Gospel at all times, and when necessary use words.” — Aaron Rogers Quoting Francis of Assisi
  3. “Diplomacy is the art of saying “Nice doggie” until you find a rock.” — Will Rogers
  4. “Before they invented drawing boards, what did they go back to?” — Patti Molloy
  5. “The way we’re going… if I called up another pitcher, he’d just hang up the phone on me.” — Any Brewers Manager
  6. “When someone is impatient and says I haven’t got all day,” I always wonder, “How can that be? How can you not have all day?” — George Carlin
  7. “We’re fools whether we dance or not, so we might as well dance.” — Old & Wise Japanese Proverb
  8. “Blessed are the cracked – for they are the ones who let in the light.” — Donfucius
  9. “Good judgment comes from experience, and a lot of that comes from bad judgment.” — Will Rogers
  10. “I don’t mind how much my Ministers talk, so long as they do what I say.” — Margaret Thatcher

ATL
RSS

ATL's Anti-Counterfeiting Digest

Archive for March, 2010



$75 Million In Stolen Pharmaceuticals Now Head To Black Market.

March 30th, 2010

Prescription Drugs Heist

The Eli Lilly warehouse is seen here in Enfield, Conn., Tuesday, March 16, 2010. Authorities say tens of millions of dollars worth of prescription drugs have been stolen in a brazen, well-planned heist at a pharmaceutical company’s regional warehouse in Connecticut. (AP Photo/Journal Inquirer, Leslloyd F. Alleyne).

DRUG THEFT

Please read the entire story as written Matthew Perrone and published by The Associated Press. Because of copyright laws I cannot print it at this location.

Please read our article “Mixing It Up” which immediately follows this story. You will gain some valuable insight as to how track and trace/ security labels and packaging can protect the public from incidents such as this.

Mixing It Up.

March 21st, 2010

Mixing and rotating overt, covert, and forensic technologies can thwart counterfeiters.

By Donald J. Dobert
President and Chief Operating Officer
ATL Security Label Systems

It has been said dozens of times already, there is no silver bullet against counterfeiters and diverters. You’ve got to layer, layer, and layer some more. In the photograph below we have illustrated the different “layers” of a 3D hologram. These invisible layers give the security label three color kinetic movement.

These “layers”, which are not immediately known to the counterfeiters, can be mixed and rotated to protect original products and documents. In the example below a German ID card has hologram layers that reveal a pattern when the card is moved back and forth.

In the photo below, courtesy of Graphic Security Systems Corporation, Lake Worth, FL, you can easily see how (during manufacturing) each “layer” is structured with different anti-counterfeiting properties.

Just what exactly does layering mean? What layer comes first, what layers need constant updates, and what layers stay put? Who decides when and when to layer, when to update the layers, and when do you need to inform FDA?
A “mix and rotate” approach brings multiple technologies together in one package. To “mix and rotate” can be compared to software updates. As computer hackers invent new “bugs,” software companies develop new “anti bugs.” Every time you as a brand owner produce your product, you can “mix and rotate” the following security features:

Tamper-evident breakaway closures.
Invisible, hidden markers.
Anticounterfeiting holograms.
Color-shifting inks.
Tamper-evident unit closure.
Mass-serialization.
Two-dimensional bar codes.
RFID chips.
Void security closures or destructible tapes.

Here is an example. Tamper-evident substrates can employ destructible, paper-based face stock or nonreproducible covert security fibers. Distribution can be limited to approved secure suppliers for a secure chain of custody. Tamper-evident substrates can make label removal impossible without visible damage. Such features effectively deter remarking and help ensure product authenticity. They also provide simple in-field authentication.
In addition, color-shifting inks and other covert features can be public signals of authenticity. Invisible forensic markers alone can be used to detect whether a product has been repackaged or relabeled. Such forensic markers may be used in the varnish on the package as well as customized or serialized codes and holograms.
Combining these technologies, the hologram would be an overt feature, the forensic marker would be a covert one, and the code could be either overt or covert, depending on what you are doing with it. Special codes can be purchased or created that pertain to only one product, which tells the manufacturer where it was made, how it was distributed and on what days. While there are codes that are very obvious and basically list manufacture date and product code, there is a wide range of options in customized codes.
A Ubiquitous Example
Modern U.S. currency has changed many times over the past few years. With the exception of the one-dollar bill, all of these notes are obsolete (see photo below). This is because the U.S. government “mixes and rotates” (M&R) its overt and covert techniques to stay one step ahead of the counterfeiters.

Shown below are examples of anti-counterfeiting “layered levels” of the “ever-changing” “face” of U.S. notes. You will notice the different colors when compared to the notes that are now obsolete:


Overt and covert M&R anticounterfeiting measures include fine detail with raised intaglio printing on bills. This allows nonexperts to easily spot forgeries. As a side note, on coins, milled or reeded (marked with parallel grooves) edges are used to show that none of the valuable metal has been scraped off. This detects the shaving or clipping (paring off) of the rim of the coin. However, this does not detect sweating, or shaking coins in a bag and collecting the resulting dust. Since this technique removes a smaller amount, it is primarily used on the most valuable coins, such as gold.
For paper bills, in the late twentieth century, advances in computer and photocopy technology made it possible for people without sophisticated training to easily copy currency. To combat this, national engraving bureaus began to include new (more sophisticated) anticounterfeiting systems such as holograms, multicolored bills, and embedded devices such as strips, microprinting, and inks whose colors change depending on the angle of the light. New technology also includes the use of design features such as the “Eurion Constellation,” which disables modern photocopiers.

Detecting counterfeit bills often isn’t easy to do by eye. One bogus $100 bill believed to have been made in North Korea, for instance, would be nearly impossible for a novice to identify as a fake. It has the security strip on the left side of the bill and a watermark of Ben Franklin (whose portrait is on the bill) on the right-hand side, as well as replicating other security features. However, its paper contains no starch and doesn’t reflect ultraviolet light, which is one sign of a counterfeit.Photo Below. The portrait on a genuine $50 bill (left) compared to a counterfeit. Notice the relative flatness and lack of detail on the fake bill.

Photo Below: The portrait on a genuine $50 bill (left) compared to a counterfeit. Notice the relative flatness and lack of detail on the fake bill.

Photo Below. $50 bill with three security features highlighted. A section of the security thread is visible in the circle near the portrait. The large circle to the right shows the watermark, and below that the color-shifting ink is circled.

There is now a scanner that searches for missing covert features in bogus “Super Dollars.” The device looks at several aspects of the bill to confirm its legitimacy. U.S. paper money is printed with magnetic ink, but that’s also used for many fraudulent bills. On real bills, the ink is distributed in a consistent pattern whose magnetic resonance can be mapped. The magnetic map is stored in the scanner, as well as three other maps containing ultraviolet, infrared, and other measurements taken from legitimate bills. Scanning a bill takes less than one second. If there’s any spike or anomaly in any of the threads of data, the scanner rejects the dollar.

Photo Below. Beginning with Series 2004, $10, $20, and $50 bills received a redesign with several changes to their overall look, notably the addition of more colors (see the picture of the $50 bill above). Probably the most important new security feature is the addition of EURion Constellations, a distinct arrangement of symbols (in this case, numbers) which triggers many color photocopiers to refuse to copy the bill.

SUPER LABELS=SUPER DOLLARS

What I have just described is a “layered” approach in anticounterfeiting. You may not be the government fighting “super dollars,” but then again, you are fighting to protect your brand from counterfeiters. The money a brand owner saves in brand protection and litigation should be considered as “super dollars” to the brand owner. In the process (of saving money), the brand owner will be protecting the public, and he can advertise as such.

PUTTING IT INTO PRACTICE
Here’s how forensic authentication works in a M&R layered approach:
A unique digital code, “ATL 12-IDGJ”, is set-up for a brand.
A digital code is incorporated into the label through multiple-entry points (inks, varnishes, adhesives).
The digital code is also incorporated into (or linked to) the pedigree documentation.
A scanner will indicate that “ATL 12-IDGJ” is the established digital code, allowing traceability.

Such uniqueness cannot be duplicated because the invisible, nondegradable forensic digital code is virtually impossible for the counterfeiters to duplicate. It only takes a second to authenticate a product anywhere in the world.


Today, FDA does not need to know what type of anticounterfeiting measures you are taking. In fact, to protect themselves, brand owners should limit such details to a certain number of trained individuals who are monitoring what features are being used and for how long.
Most important in the anticounterfeiting arsenal is the brand owner’s mindset. Nothing changes until this does. Counterfeiters have the mindset that they can break the laws, provide fake or diluted products, and they do not care if they place the public in harms way. We (you and I) have to assume the mindset that says to the counterfeit, “No, you can’t copy my products.”

Thank you for your time. Donald J. Dobert, President, ATL.

Bad Malaria Pills Raise Drug Resistance Fears.

March 10th, 2010

10-Country Study In Africa Finds High Rates Of Poor Quality Medicine.

Story Courtesy of The Associated Press and MSNBC.com

High rates of the most effective type of malaria-fighting drugs sold in three African countries are poor quality – including nearly half the pills sampled in Senegal – raising fears of increased drug resistance that could wipe out the last weapon left to battle a disease that kills 1 million people each year, according to a U.S. report released Monday.

Between 16 percent and 40 percent of artemisinin-based drugs sold in Senegal, Madagascar and Uganda failed quality testing, including having impurities or not containing enough active ingredient, the survey found.

Artemisinin-based drugs are the only affordable treatment for malaria left in the global medicine cabinet. Other drugs have already lost effectiveness due to resistance, which builds when not enough medicine is taken to kill all of the mosquito-transmitted parasites.

Mosquito

If artemisinin-based drugs stop working, there is no good replacement and experts worry many people could die.

“It is worrisome that almost all of the poor-quality data that was obtained was a result of inadequate amounts of active (ingredients) or the presence of impurities in the product,” said Patrick Lukulay, director of a nongovernmental U.S. Pharmacopeia program funded by the U.S. government, which conducted the survey. “This is a disturbing trend that came to light.”

The study is the first part of a 10-country examination of antimalarials in Africa by the U.S. and the World Health Organization. It follows evidence from the Thai-Cambodian border that artemisinin-based drugs there are taking longer to cure malaria patients, the first sign of drug resistance.

The three-country report also found bad drugs in both the public and private health sectors, meaning governments – some buying medicines with donor funds – are not doing enough to keep poor-quality pills out. All of the drugs tested from the public sector in Uganda, however, passed the quality tests. But 40 percent of the artemisinin-based drugs in Senegal failed.

“There are countries where donated medicines are not subjected to quality controls, they’re just accepted,” said Lukulay. “There are countries in Africa where Chinese products have been donated and found to be unacceptable later in the public sector.”

‘A wake-up call’

A total of 444 samples of artemisinin-based combination drugs along with the antimalarial sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine – to which resistance has already developed – were first screened locally using visual inspection and basic lab tests. Sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine is still used, mainly for preventative treatment for pregnant women .

Nearly 200 samples then underwent full quality control testing in a U.S. laboratory to examine the amount of active ingredient present and drug purity. For both drugs, 44 percent from Senegal failed the full quality testing, followed by 30 percent from Madagascar and 26 percent from Uganda.

While the study is not the first to assess the quality of antimalarials in Africa, it is the most rigorous and complete. Similar failure rates were found in previous work, but those did not focus specifically on artemisinin-based drugs.

“I am alarmed by these results because it means there are many cases of malaria that are being only partially treated, and that just guarantees acceleration of artemisinin drug resistance,” said Rachel Nugent, deputy director for Global Health at the Center for Global Development, a U.S. think tank. “It is the most comprehensive study out there on antimalarials and should be a wake-up call.”

Nugent was not involved in the study.

In all three countries, the antimalarial brands collected from various areas and sectors tended to either do well across the board or poorly, which could prove helpful for governments working to ban low-grade drugs.

Results from the other countries surveyed – Cameroon, Ethiopia, Ghana, Kenya, Malawi, Nigeria and Tanzania – have not yet been publicly released by the WHO. But Clive Ondari, who worked on the study for the WHO in Geneva, said failure rates in three of those countries were also significantly high.

Ghana has already withdrawn more than 20 drugs from the market after receiving the initial results, Lukulay said.

Digest Break. Today’s quote to make you think: “If we ever forget that we’re one Nation under God, then we will be a Nation gone under.” — Ronald Reagan