A lot of things related to ePedigree in the U.S. supply chain are cooking right now but they seem to be happening a little too slowly, so it will be interesting to see where it all ends up in the next few years.  After developing the Drug Pedigree Messaging Standard (DPMS) in 2006-2007, GS1 is now taking only the initial steps toward adding network-centric ePedigree capabilities to their EPCIS and related standards.  The California Board of Pharmacy says they would like to be able to accept a semi-centralized network centric approach as long as it includes all the stuff listed in their pedigree law.  For nearly 18 months, GS1 U.S. has been “nearing publication” of a draft guideline—six years in the making—that is supposed to help companies who want to use EPCIS to meet the California law.  Congress considered passing a Federal track & trace regulation that would have preempted the California law last year but failed from lack of agreement between the parties.  Some companies are making good progress on meeting the serialization requirement but the number who have the pedigree part figured out are those who have settled on DPMS.  All the while the California pedigree deadlines are rushing toward us like a bus-sized asteroid heading straight toward Earth.  Not surprisingly, the asteroid is moving faster than the efforts to divert or absorb it.

I’ve written about my theory that the date of impact won’t be pushed out again, no matter what happens (for a full explanation of that theory, see “Will The California ePedigree Dates Slip Again?”).

What can be done?  In my view, it’s going to be determined by Continue reading California ePedigree Uncertainty →