[e-farmacos] El abuso de patentes en Financial Times

[e-farmacos@usa.healthnet.org]

E-farmacos: El abuso de patentes en Financial Times
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

[HH, moderador de e-drug, ha incluido en la lista este comentario sobre
las patentes y los paises desarrollados que, curiosamente, aparecio en
la edicion del 22 de octubre del Financial Times. Gracias, AF]

Patent abuse
Financial Times; Oct 22, 2001

Western governments are guilty of double standards. Having defended the
inviolability of pharmaceutical patents in the developing world, they
are ready to override them at home as alarm about bioterrorism spreads.

Health authorities across the world are stocking up on anti-anthrax
drugs. The US government is talking to pharmaceutical company Bayer
about relaxing its patent on Cipro, the only treatment for all strains
of anthrax. Last week, the Canadian government placed a large order for
the generic version of Cipro, defying Bayer's patent.

The pressure on Bayer contrasts with the support given to pharmaceutical
companies to defend their Aids drugs patents in developing countries.
Yet the case for defending Bayer's rights in the rich west is stronger.

The risk of a large anthrax attack is small. The disease is not
contagious. Of course, governments must take the necessary steps to
protect their populations. Building up supplies of medicine is therefore
prudent. But whether 11 confirmed cases of infection and one death count
as an extreme public health emergency, under
which patent rights may be suspended, is a moot point. The scare
certainly looks trivial alongside the public health disaster facing
Africa, where 25m people face the prospect of dying of Aids unless they
are treated.

Neither is there a practical case for breaking the Cipro patent. Bayer
has already pledged to triple US production, making 200m tablets over
the next three months, and to step up supply from its plants in other
countries. It is also prepared to license production by other companies.
Demand for the drug is rising fast but Bayer should be able to meet it.

Although cost is hardly the issue, Canada could agree cheaper bulk
purchases with the company. If Canada or the US insist that generic
production is the only way of fulfilling their needs, they should pay
appropriate compensation to Bayer.

The pharmaceutical industry has not always acted with the noblest
intentions. Some companies use underhand tactics to monopolise markets
after their patents have expired; others have not done enough to make
their products affordable in poorer countries.

That said, companies must have their patents protected to ensure that
money is available to fund research into new treatments. The industry
should work with poor countries to reduce prices, with help from the
west. But in the developed world the industry's right to a proper return
must be respected if research is to continue.

[En la pagina web de Finacial Times:
http://globalarchive.ft.com/globalarchive/article.html?id=011022000879&query=patent+++Cipro
puede consultarse el texto anterior, asi como otros articulos
relacionados con el tema, AF]


[NOTA: Mensaje sin acentos ni caracteres especiales.]
-
Envíe el correo para la conferencia de `e-farmacos' a:
e-farmacos@usa.healthnet.org
Envíe las peticiones administrativas a:
majordomo@usa.healthnet.org
Para la ayuda adicional, envíe el correo a:
owner-e-farmacos@usa.healthnet.org