Thailand Breaks AIDS Drug Patent

[Crushdepth]

Politically, this is very naive. Government sanctioned robbery of intellectual property rights will cost the country in the future.

This is an issue that needs a bit of balance - it's not like they have legitimised copying CDs or something, people will die if they can't get this stuff. I don't want to see the company that invested in making this drug go out of business, but I don't want to see people dropping dead because they can't afford it, either. It's not like everyone with HIV in Thailand can pay their own way.

The real question is: What is the cost charged to the patient.

I'm currently under cancer treatment. the medicines prescribed and provided by the hospital are incredibly expensive. Looking for alternative providers has resulted in a cost differential of 45%. That means the hospital takes minimum a 45 % mark up.The alternative provider also need to make a buck, so were talking total markup roughly 50%+

This is a good point. I *have* to take a drug as well (not for cancer, thank god). I can buy it over the counter (illegally? not sure) for about 3,000 baht/packet from wholesale pharmacies at Victory Monument, but if I buy it from a hospital under doctors prescription it is 6,000 baht (minimum)- they are slapping on at least a 100% markup. Bangkok / B'rad charge close to 8,000.

Good luck with your treatment.

[Mid]

Public Health minister Mongkol na Songkhla said Thailand will not be breaking any international laws by producing Efavirenz locally, although the move is likely to spark a protest from Merck, Sharp and Dohm, the US pharmaceutical giant that owns the patent on the drug.

"Of course, the company will do something to oppose this but we're doing everything according to not only the country's law but also international law," Mongkol said.

Thailand has recorded 1,088,692 HIV/AIDS cases since the pandemic was first detected in the kingdom in the early 1980s.

Of the recorded cases, some 534,065 have already died.

Source: DPA - 1 December 2006

Taken from the OP ,

well done Thailand

[Johpa]

Bottom line is - do you think public ownership of Pharma R&D would produce any results - they will be dead in the streets first.

Dr. Marcia Angell's book The Truth About the Drug Companies points out that most of the R&D for new drugs is done by small research companies who are indeed funded by public grants by such agencies as the NIH. The big companies only later purchase the rights to distribute these drugs that were developed on tax payers dollars. She notes it is actually quite rare for the big Pharma companies to develop new drugs and take them through the early stages of Phase I and Phase II testing. She shows that the big Pharma companies are good at making small changes to existing drugs in order to maintain a patentable product, but the same companies are very poor at devising trials that would show that the new formulation actually produces better results than the old formulation, as those same corporations make sure such trials are not part of the Federally mandated testing requirements. After reading her book you will begin to understand that the big Pharma companies are marketing companies and not drug research and development companies. And they have an amazing amount of political influence to move legislation in their favor for the sole purpose to maximize profits at any expense. They are the corporate versions of Taksin Shinawat in America, hiding behind the smoke and mirrors and the Madison Avenues of the corporate world.

So to answer your question, why yes, public ownership of Pharma R&D, in the US at least, has long produced results that are then hijacked by these marketing companies. But don't believe me as I am just an anonymous poster summarizing out here in the ether of cyberspace, go to a library, and read the book written by an author with bonafide credentials.

[pyros]

We seam to agree all on this ... copying isn't good but in some cases it should be allowed . I'd like to add , if they copy it , for their people , because otherwise it would be impossible to buy it , the government together with the original company need to control the complete process . That is , the making and distribution , in which they can see that the product goes to the right people ...

[Bottlerocket]

Some people are of the opinion that it's the company's right to retain the patent and control the price as they are they originators of the product. Other people are of the opinion that a million people are dying and that law, in this instance, has no legitimacy by virtue of the amount of life poised to be lost. Essentially, the pharmaceutical company is price gouging. During the Hurricane Katrina incident several of the states involved passed price gouging laws to halt what began to happen. The price of essential goods, i.e. batteries, flashlights, canned foods, started to rise astronomically. Well, of course, everyone started to complain--just like Thailand and other countries. If America is all about freemarket competition, why are laws like this allowed to be passed. Certainly the market is free to fluctuation and demand cycles, but it seems that in the end they had a conscience. What about now?

[Scott]

I am not a particularly big fan of the pharmaceutical companies, but they are like every other business and they exist to make a profit. In order to make money, they have to produce new and different drugs, this costs money. To produce these drugs they need top researchers and scientists, this costs money. To make sure that they pay shareholders, it costs money.

They are a business, and as such, they are truly short on ethics, but when they stop R&D, we all will have a big problem. As Ijustwannateach said, they haven't developed vaccines (not many) because there isn't much money in vaccine. If you noticed, neither have any gov'ts been able to produce them.

So if you get rid of the profitability of the pharmaceutical companies whose going to develop the next line of drugs?

[jasperblubber2005]

congratulations to thailand, putting there people first is something i will always support especially when they have to go toe to toe with the forever greedy drug companys, i won't shed a tear for these blood suckers, too many times back in the states you come across people who have to make a choice between food or medicine, there are somethings that i feel everyone should have a right to and having medication to sustain ones life is one of them.

you can beleive all the sad stories about research costs and etc, etc but the bottom line is profit and if people die because they can't afford it, tough luck, the threat of stopping the making of new drugs is bunk if they stop other companies will come along to fill the void, and we can all hope that they're not as greedy as the bunch we are dealing with now

jasper

[toptuan]

As a teacher in the university system, I have to constantly remind my business students that Thailand will never rise beyond a developing (or 3rd world country) as long as its citizens are happy to prirate others' ideas and original research. I usually have to give this little speech after uncovering plagiarism on assignments. Copying from the internet is the usual offense. The problem is rife in academic circles, and takes place from the highest levels of university administration down to the 4th year primary student.

So, reading about another pirating infringement at the expense of international law, this time condoned at the highest levels of government, leaves me with mixed feelings as well.

[slimdog]

So, reading about another pirating infringement at the expense of international law, this time condoned at the highest levels of government, leaves me with mixed feelings as well.

Whilst the headline is somewhat misleading the truth is that Thailand is neither pirating the medicine or breaking any International laws. Thailand has announced that it will seek a Compulsory licence from the trademark holder. The licence in question is in total compliance of the WTO Cancun agreement of which both Thailand and the USA have signed.

The copyright holder, Merck, will be paid some money for each tablet produced.

[Greer]

Thank you slimdog - the voice of reason I think.

To those who worry about the effect on business:

It is a critical requirement to help save lives - if your loved one was dying, would you be so concerned?

As slimdog said, the Thai government are within their legal rights to make this move.

There is no comparison, similarity or link betwen the compulsory licensing of drugs by the government and the illegal pirating of music/movies/software - likening the two is most inappropriate - I feel uncomforable even mentioning the two issues in the same sentence.

/edit spelling

Edited December 4, 2006 by Greer

[Johpa]

So if you get rid of the profitability of the pharmaceutical companies whose going to develop the next line of drugs?

As I noted, the pharmaceutical companies are not now developing the next line of drugs nor are they the companies that developed the previous "next line" of drugs. Most new drugs are developed in small companies and in universities with the aid of government grants as explained in detail in Angell's book.

[ColPyat]

So if you get rid of the profitability of the pharmaceutical companies whose going to develop the next line of drugs?

As I noted, the pharmaceutical companies are not now developing the next line of drugs nor are they the companies that developed the previous "next line" of drugs. Most new drugs are developed in small companies and in universities with the aid of government grants as explained in detail in Angell's book.

And additionally, many of the patents, especially in AIDS drugs, are not even held by the pharmaceutical companies, but by universities who have developed the drugs in the first place. Because of the complex patent law it often is very difficult to find the original patent holders in some cases and deal with them directly, and pharmceutical companies go to astoninshing lengths to prevent generic manufacturers to find that out. It is enlightening to converse on this issue with people like Krisana Kraisintu, the former head of the development department of the Thai Governmental Pharmaceutical Organisation, the women who developed the famous generic antiretroviral combination drug GPO -vir.

All smokes and mirrors.

[Johpa]

How timely, this morning's headlines in my local paper "Pfizer shares sink after key drug halted". Now we might think, oh poor big pharma has to deal with major investment risks so thus need to charge an arm and a leg for their drugs in order to be profitable. But read closer and you see in the AP article that

"The news is devastating to Pfizer, which had been counting on the drug to revitalize stagnant sales that have been hurt by numerous patent expirations on key products. It has said it was spending around $800 million to develop torcetrapib, which was supposed to fill the void when its best-selling drug, cholesterol treatment Lipitor, loses patent protection in either 2010 or 2011."

Pfizer was not investing in any new drug, they were only attempting to reformulate an older drug, Lipitor whose patent was about to expire. If the new drug had passed the Phase III study there would not have been any further tests to determine whether the new drug was indeed superior to Lipitor but, as primarily a marketing company, the sales force would attempt, and usually succeed, in convincing the easily duped and compliant medical community, who enjoy professional seminars in warm climates sponsored by big Pharma, to make the switch when prescribing drugs for their patients.

I am not shedding any tears for shareholders of Pfizer although I feel a bit bad for the families of the 10,000 people, mostly in their sales force as they are marketing compnay, who are likely to be laid off, according to the AP report.

[Jai Dee]

Thai ministry OKs AIDS drug patent license

BEIJING, Dec. 6 (Xinhuanet) -- Thailand's public health ministry announced Wednesday it will issue a compulsory license for a patent held by the Merck pharmaceutical company for the AIDS treatment drug efavirenz.

Thailand is developing its own generic version of the drug using the country's public drug manufacturer, the Government Pharmaceutical Organization. Production is expected to begin next year, and the compulsory license will allow the importation of generic efavirenz from India in the meantime.

International organization Médecins Sans Frontières (Medicine Without Frontiers) welcomed the decision and urged the government to issue similar licenses for other essential medicines.

According to MSF's figures, Merck charges almost double what Indian generic companies demand to make the same drug. It also claims that supply has been inadequate.

However, Merck reduced the price of the drug in developing countries earlier this year.

Merck declined to comment on the government announcement.

Efavirenz is marketed by Bristol-Myers Squibb in the U.S. and some European countries under the brand name Sustiva and in other countries by Merck under the name Stocrin.

Source: Xinhua - 6 December 2006

[Scott]

There are a lot of lessons already learned and apparently some haven't been learned too well. The last line of drugs was, as is so often the case, "done on the cheap." This has resulted in the development of immunity to the drugs and the need for the second line of defense.

I had a former employee who was on the verge of death from AIDS. He was literally sent home to die. I spoke with his doctor who said they could try treatment, but the doctor said the locally made drugs would not significantly help. His family (although they had the money--not a lot, but enough) didn't want to buy the expensive imported drugs. They reasoned that the doctor was just getting a cut. I eventually paid for and started him on treatment (the Dr. agreed, but released him from hospital as there wasn't anything they could do). Within a month he was able to return to work. The following year he obtained his Masters Degree etc., etc., Three people from his same village have since died while on the locally made drug (a combination of only two, not the three recommended).

Yes, big pharmaceutical companies are businesses and they are out to make money and yes, they do all the horrible things that every other company does to make money. They are, however, not the enemy. Stocrin is not that expensive in Thailand. It is well within the ability of the government to buy it for patients who need it--remember not ALL patients need the drug. I am sure that if Thaksin pays his tax bill, there are a lot of people who could get the drug for a very long time.

My former employee now pays for all his own medication, as well as his new car.

Thailand is not a 3rd world African nation, it is developing and developing rapidly. They can put some of those resources where they are needed and start conducting themselves in a decent manner. They really don't see the consequences of killing the goose that lays the golden eggs.