HEALTH CARE MUST BE A FREE ISSUE NO ONE HAS TO PAY TO BE HEALTHY BETTER IF THEY NEED HELP WE INTEND TO GIVE IT AWY FOR FREE

Background:

“The latest statistics on the world epidemic of AIDS & HIV were published by UNAIDS/WHO in November 2006, and refer to the end of 2006.”

• “More than 25 million people have died of AIDS since 1981.”

• “Africa has 12 million AIDS orphans.”

• “At the end of 2006, women accounted for 48% of all adults living with HIV worldwide, and for 59% in sub-Saharan Africa.”

• “Young people (under 25 years old) account for half of all new HIV infections worldwide – around 6,000 become infected with HIV every day.”

• “In developing and transitional countries, 7.1 million people are in immediate need of life-saving AIDS drugs; of these, only 2.015 million (28%) are receiving the drugs.”
  Compliments of Avert.org

Furthermore, in 2005, Sub-Saharan Africa alone had an estimated 24.5 million individuals who were HIV positive. Unfortunately, as noted above, pharmaceutical giants like Pfizer stand in the way and erect roadblocks in the path towards effective treatment options. The HIV/AIDS epidemic has spurred technological and medical innovations introduced as antiretroviral drugs (ARVs).

“Antiretroviral drugs (anti-HIV drugs or HIV antiviral drugs) are currently the main weapon in the fight against HIV. Such drugs have to be taken indefinitely, and although not a cure, can prevent the onset of illness for many years. They treat the HIV infection directly, and basically act by slowing down the reproduction of HIV in the body.”

• Compliments of Kirsty Levasseur 
School of Chemistry
 University of Bristol:
  http://www.chm.bris.ac.uk/webprojects2002/levasseur/

The Roadblock:

Patents and Trade-Related Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) utilized by the major multi-national drug companies pertaining to ARVs have put a virtual stranglehold on individuals in developing countries from accessing affordable medications to treat HIV.

The TRIPS agreement brings intellectual property rights under one common set of international rules and establishes the minimum levels of protection that all countries within the World Trade Organization must give to the intellectual property of fellow members.

The TRIPS agreement can only be enforced by the laws of individual countries; it is not an automatic universal law. For example, if country A had no intellectual property laws whatsoever, then there would essentially be nothing to stop its citizens copying, say, a new type of toaster produced by country B, even if country B did have laws to protect it. TRIPS prevents this from happening by encouraging member countries to introduce its rules as law (or face severe penalties from the WTO). Once these laws are set up in country A therefore, country B could then register the patent for the toaster with them, and copying and reproducing it would become illegal.

This system ensures that profits from any new product go exclusively to the patent holder for the full duration of the patent. This in turn funds further research and development (R&D) and, in theory, encourages innovation by ensuring those with innovative ideas are rewarded.”

• Compliments of Avert.org

Outside of TRIPS limitations, a government administering a developing nation could in effect issue a compulsory license to another corporation who would then develop a generic version of a patented or copyrighted proprietary drug, which empirically (India & Brazil) lowers prices, increases access, and increases availability exponentially.

However, Pfizer continues to charge prices in developing countries that exceed national and personal budgets. They argue that: “their prices reflect the amount of research and development required to manufacture the drug.

However, though it is not always easy to tell exactly how much money is spent by large pharmaceutical companies in different areas, much of their profits are thought to go on executive salaries, publicity, advertising, promotion, corporate sponsorship and branding, rather than R&D.”

• Compliments of Avert.org

So, why do African countries just develop generic versions similar to Brazil and India?

“Any country wishing to produce generic drugs faces similar problems to India, unless they are a ‘least developed’ country that doesn’t have to implement TRIPS rules until 2016 (and even then, many already have some form of established patent laws).

As well as problems with IP, there are many practical issues to be overcome when establishing generic manufacturing capacity too. Pharmaceutical industries require expertise and substantial resources to set up, as well as a readily available source of basic raw ingredients, good infrastructure and a skilled workforce. A method of regulating drugs is also needed within any country that produces them. At present the WHO does run a very successful scheme to assess generic drugs on a global scale and ensure they are bio-equivalent (i.e. the same in potency and effectiveness) to their proprietary counterparts, but even they stress that they are not a regulatory or drug-safety body and should not be treated as such.

Generic production can also give rise to political difficulties. Any country that copies drugs originally manufactured by a large Western nation may risk a lack of investment from that nation and potential cuts in bilateral aid. The US in particular sees generic manufacture as damaging international trade and American company profits.”

• Compliments of Avert.org

Additionally, outside of TRIPS regulations, Pfizer actively seeks to monopolize the market at their determined price. Other major Western countries such as Canada offer generic alternatives from their pharmacies. However, according to Karlene Bradley:

“When I got my last package of prescriptions from Canada. The pharmacy enclosed a notice about Pfizer drug company. It seems that Pfizer is refusing to sell any of their drugs to Canadian pharmacies that serve Americans so we will be forced to buy Pfizer products in the US at higher prices than offered...Read More