EU Warns Thailand On Patent Pressure
4 CommentsBy Ed Silverman // August 9th, 2007 // 10:01 pm
Thailand has been warned by the European Commission against moves to force drugmakers to drop prices for poor patients or lose sales, adding to US pressure over patent protection, The Financial Times reports.
Peter Mandelson, the trade commissioner, has written to Bangkok to protest its use of compulsory licences, allowing it to import cheaper generics of branded meds, the Times adds. Thailand was the first middle-income country to break the patent on a medicine to treat a non-infectious disease and to threaten compulsory licences for an array of other such drugs.
Mandelson’s letter, seen by the Financial Times, says Bangkok “may be taking a new approach on access to medicinesâ€. It says the military government has “stated that if drug companies wish to do business in Thailand they should offer their drugs for no more than 5 per cent above the generic cost. This approach is a matter of concern for the European Union and would be detrimental to the patent system, and so to innovation and the development of new medicines.â€
Mandelson says it would infringe World Trade Organisation regulations, which allow countries to waive intellectual property rules to fight emergency health epidemics once all other avenues have been explored. He encouraged Bangkok to negotiate with Sanofi-Aventis, which makes Plavix, a drug for heart disease that has been supplanted by cheap Indian imports.
The EU and US protested formally in February when Bangkok suspended the patents of three drugs treating AIDS and heart conditions. The US also threatened retaliatory action, placing Thailand on a “watch list†for intellectual property infringement.
Thailand has yet to reply to Brussels, but has denied these charges in the past. “It took the Thai Ministry of Public Health more than two years, including discussions with pharmaceutical companies, before it made its final decision,†the foreign ministry said in May. The cheap drugs were only available through its public health system, covering 48m poor Thais, it added.
“Some 20 per cent of Thais can afford to pay out of their own pockets, and more than 2m foreign patients will continue to pay market prices for the original patented products. Out of the 300,000 patients with coronary problems, less than 10 per cent have access to Clopidogrel, also known as Plavix,†the statement said.
The pioneering approach of Mongkol Na Songkhla, health minister, has won praise from the UN as well as health campaigners such as Médecins Sans Frontières and Oxfam.
Mandelson’s tough language will antagonize the European parliament. His letter was written in July just days before Ministers of the European Parliament from all parties called on the EU to back more flexible compulsory licensing rules at the WTO.
Sanofi could not be reached for comment on Thursday. But drugmakers say patents ensure they can recoup investments on new medicine and that without them research would dry up.
Someone
Thailand is the only Southeast Asian country to have never been colonized by the EU.
Their currency, the bhat, is currently at about .37 to the American dollar. Not hard to see why buying drugs to keep their citizens healthy is more of a hardship for them then it is us.
We are missing the bigger opportunity here in Thailand. In spite of the coup last year and the change in government. Look at what the health minister is trying to do with regards to prevention. Lately he has banned all alcohol advertising and even though it has not yet become law, the media are following through (yeah, yeah, I know what you are thinking - but still). Thailand has made major strides in eradicating illegal drugs produced in their country. We should all get together and provide incentives to them i.e. reduced costs on legal drugs, in order to completely reduce the illegal drugs produced. Why don’t we offer that to all these countries that produce illegal drug crops? Yes, 95% of its citizens are Buddhists, and that is why prevention programs will probably have a higher rate of success.
So, here we are in some of the wealthiest countries, with our grossly obese citizens, smoking, and drinking their health away and we want to wreak havoc over in Thailand because they are trying to do something about it by launching prevention campaigns and trying to access cheaper drugs for their own citizens.
Is it just me?
Access Advocate
I am all for public access. And I think it is completely neccessary to take rash steps here and there to make positive changes in public health.
However, I am in favor of innovation, and when a country abuses its right to compulsory license it gives other countries the wrong impression of what the TRIPS treaty implied when it include that language.
It is like the teacher in grammar school always said, “If I let you goto the bathroom now, I will have to let everyone go…” Once one country does this consistently, others will follow suit, and soon patents will mean nothing. Without protection of intellectual property, no one is going to put in the hard time and effort to develop new and innovative drugs.
And then where will new AIDS drugs for the Thai people come from?
Someone
How much does innovation cost? Who decides how much innovation costs? If we base the cost of innovation on the economics of the wealthy developed countries, then we are all guilty of genocide.
The costs involved in “innovation” have gotten out of hand, not to mention the fact that if you ask anyone in Pharma who knows anything, they will always “overstate” the cost of innovation.
You actually think Thailand is being abusive? Interesting…
Maybe what these countries are trying to make us do is focus and use our intellectual might to figure out how to bring these life saving/extending drugs to market in a much more efficient manner.
Maybe we should stop the name calling and game of smoke and mirrors that distract from the real issues - if we need drugs at all then we need them to be accessible by all people.
BTW, the grammar school bathroom thing - honestly how can that possibly be an analogy used in the context of preserving human life?
Melody
Without protection of intellectual property, no one is going to put in the hard time and effort to develop new and innovative drugs.
Yeah–without financial incentive, no innovator will explore and research just for the heck of it. Think of those greedy bastards–Banting & Best–who discovered insulin. They made a veritable FORTUNE when they discovered/isolated insulin! And without sufficient incentive, they would probably just have gone out and mowed the grass, right?
(BTW, B&B licensed insulin for $1 . . . so much for your economic theory. Innovators, scientists, explorers . . . they do the work because they WANT to do the work, it is what drives them. On the other hand, if they need to live, and sell their life to a corporation –we ALL know what drives corporations, don’t we?)