'Big Pharma' slammed over third-world drug domination

According to the World Health Organisation (WHO) 74 per cent of AIDS medicines are still under monopoly, 77 per cent of Africans still have no access to AIDS treatment, and 30 per cent of the world's population still do not have regular access to essential medicines.

The study was commissioned to mark the fifth anniversary of the Doha Declaration, an affirmation stating the right of all countries to protect public health by making available low cost drugs in the developing world.

However, the charity Oxfam has slammed efforts to enforce the commitments made by participating governments, accusing them of taking little or no action towards their obligations and in some cases undermining the declaration.

The charity saved its biggest attack on the US, home to numerous giant pharmaceutical companies, accusing the nation of bullying developing countries into not using the measures in the Doha declaration and accused the EU of doing nothing.

The Doha declaration technically allows poor countries to buy cheap copies of desperately needed drugs but the US is accused of trying to prevent countries such as Thailand and India, which have manufacturing capacity, making and selling cheap generic versions so as to preserve the monopolies of the drug giants.

Specific points written into the declaration say that developing countries must be able to use public health safeguards written into the WTO's intellectual property rules (TRIPS) in order to access cheaper generic versions of patented medicines.

"Generic competition is the most sustainable way to keep the price of medicines down,"​ said Oxfam.

"Rich countries have broken the spirit of the Doha Declaration,"​ said Oxfam's Make Trade Fair campaign head Celine Charveriat.

"The declaration said the right things but needed political action to work. That hasn't happened. We've gone backwards. People are still suffering or dying needlessly."​

Of most concern was the action pharmaceutical companies took, directly challenging countries such as India and in Philippines that sought to use the safeguards.

In 2005, cancer patient groups in India used Indian intellectual property law to stop a patent application by the Swiss company Novartis for its anti-cancer drug, Glivec.

This allowed Indian companies to continue making generic versions at £1,400 (€2,071) per patient per year, as opposed to Novartis having a monopoly priced version for sale at more than £14,000 per patient per year.

However Novartis recently appealed the court's decision in a direct challenge to India's right to interpret the TRIPS agreement to protect public health. If Novartis is successful, it could jeopardise India's generic export industry.

India is the world's leading supplier of inexpensive generic medicines to developing countries, with approximately 67 per cent of its exports going to developing countries.

"Novartis has told Oxfam that there is no commercial market for Glivec in India and that it is challenging India in order to align Indian intellectual property law with TRIPS,"​ Charveriat said

"However, India is only trying to use the flexibilities rightfully available to it under TRIPS and Novartis is seeking to block that right."​

However, Paul Herrling, the company's head of corporate research, told the Reuters Health Summit last week that India risked falling behind China in drug research if it did not shore up its weak patent protection system.

He argued that the principle of intellectual property protection must be safeguarded if innovation is to flourish.

Meanwhile, a similar battle is ongoing between US drugs giant Pfizer which produces heart disease drug Norvasc and the Philippine government which has developed its own patented version, almost 90 per cent cheaper.

"Rich countries must live up to their commitments and stop undermining the Doha Declaration with their selfish actions,"​ Charveriat said.

"Now more than ever we need a global trading system that puts health before profit and makes medicines affordable for all."​