My RSS Feeds
Drug patents
Hello guys and girls, I want to begin this entry with some thank yous going out to all those who sent me some feedback during a chat or via email concerning my last post "Fair Trade". I hope you made your voices heard. =;o) In addition I also wanna thank all those who regularly visit this page because you are the ones that give me the motivation to keep this page alive, so thanks for that!
Some of you might find the following article "Drug Patents: Corporate wealth or public health" controversial but I think the author raises some good points, although I also have to add that I don't agree with everything he says. Well, here it is:
----------------------------
Drug patents: Corporate wealth or Public health?
uploaded 21 Mar 2001
Western capitalism is doing what it does best; creating human misery. Its latest assault is in the medical field of drugs research and development. The global pharmaceutical industry is spearheading the attack with the support of major western governments like America. At the heart of the conflict is whether World Trade Organisation (WTO) rules should be used to defend at all costs the drug patents and monopolistic practises of powerful companies, or whether countries with high levels of deadly illnesses should retain the right to put affordable medicine before corporate profit.
The current battlefield and latest offensive is located in South Africa. The country is suffering an acute AIDS crisis, with 10% of the population HIV-positive, more than any other country in the world. The disease is decimating its population and there is a continuing increase in the amount of sufferers in society, it has already infected 4 million people. In a desperate move to curb this widespread growth the government passed a law in 1997 which allows them to import generic drugs which are cheaper to procure. This allows the South African government to prise itself loose from the monopolistic grip imposed by patent holders like the pharmaceutical companies in order to cater for the needs of its ravaged people. This approach is cost effective for beleaguered governments and improves survival prospects for the afflicted. Brazil has such a success story. Four years ago it began to produce its own generic versions of the AIDS triple therapy drugs and importing others at low cost. Since then Brazil has halved its AIDS death rate and reduced hospitalisation for the disease. It is therefore small wonder South Africa also wants to repeat the Brazilian success story.
However, the only success the pharmaceutical companies see is the successful undermining of corporate profits by such laws and government policies. The pharmaceutical lobby which gives millions in campaign donations to the US political establishment, is constantly pushing the U.S. trade office to file cases against developing countries at the World Trade Organisation. They haven’t wasted time in demanding that Western governments take Brazil to task. Since then the US government has lodged a complaint with the WTO contending that the Brazilian law violates patent rules. In a similar fashion 40 drug companies, including corporate heavyweights like GlaxoSmithKline and Bayer, have recently put the South African government in the dock.
On 5th March they launched a court case in Pretoria challenging the law that permits the government to import generic drugs or copy patented ones. Thousands of demonstrators across the country protested in response to this move. Aid organisations, groups and health activists threw their support behind the South African government, defending its position. Dr Eric Goemaere of Médecins Sans Frontières Aids program in South Africa accused the pharmaceutical industry of unethical practises. He maintained that, “we who work in the field don't see Aids simply in terms of statistics, but as people: patients, colleagues and friends who have to be told to go home and prepare to die because the medicines that could keep them alive are not available for them. It is no longer morally acceptable to debate whether or not anti-retrovirals should be provided. We must concentrate now on finding, quickly, ways to make sure they are.” The senior policy adviser of the charity Oxfam, Kevin Watkins, called for “a fundamental reform of the WTO intellectual property rules, starting with a reduction in the period of patent protection, reinforced health safeguards and a comprehensive ban on the threatened use of trade sanctions.”
But the drugs companies’ recurrent refrain is that drugs research is an expensive business and patents create a useful incentive for firms to develop new drugs. Sir Richard Sykes of GlaxoSmithKline went as far as calling companies that make generic copies as “pirates on the high seas”. They also had the full blessing of the WTO. Mike Moore, the director-general of the WTO stated: “Industry puts the average cost of developing a new drug at around $500 million. Were it not for a patent system that rewards companies for risking millions on research, anti-AIDS drugs would not exist.”
It is obvious the two adversaries are viewing the issue of drugs patenting from two completely contradictory perspectives. The affected governments and Aids organisations consider it a death sentence to the world’s poor and afflicted since it puts medication beyond their reach whilst the pharmaceutical companies and the WTO regard it as an incentive and security for financial investment. Commenting on the role of the pharmaceutical industry, Mr. Sykes said, “this is a very important industry, not just for healthcare. It is a very important industry in this country in terms of balance of payments.” Mike Moore admits that medical research for some types of diseases is not even financially worthwhile, “There are no effective treatments for some ills that affect people in poor countries only, because developing them is not commercially viable.” He is right; the companies are too busy developing money-spinners like Viagra and obesity drugs. Countries like Brazil and South Africa that take matters into their own hands are threatened with all manner of sanctions, and that’s hardly with reference to the WTO. Under its "Special 301" trade law provision, the United States can unilaterally impose trades sanctions on countries that differ with her wishes and refuse to endorse patented drugs. In November 1999, the US used this arm-twisting tactic to force Thailand to stop using generic drugs.
In Capitalist countries, commercial interest is the motivating factor to develop new cures and treatments. Hence, any new medical treatments are seen as intellectual wealth for the benefit of pharmaceutical companies even if this means the suffering of millions. In other words, the prime objective of such companies is to make a profit, not to save lives. This, however, is not new to those who are aware of this problem. Dr. Sue Meyer of the research group, Genewatch UK observes, “Science is driven by private interest, aiming at maximising their shareholder values, rather than addressing public health issues.” What the advocates of generic drug use do not see however, is that the solution to the problem is far deeper than simple legal reforms. The self-centered and colonialist tendencies of the capitalist states were cultivated centuries ago.
The secular viewpoint of life, which the West embraced, made the pursuit of pleasure and personal interest the purpose of life. This manifested in the endless search for material benefits irrespective of the harm it may cause others. Altruistic values are alien to adherents of this viewpoint. It is therefore hardly surprising to witness the threatening and harsh behaviour of the standard-bearer of this viewpoint, America, towards other nations in regard to achieving her interests. Consequently, the only thing one will find western pharmaceutical companies sharing freely is this viewpoint in their quest to maximise profits. Even when they engage in what appears to be philanthropy such as price discounting it is merely a disguised measure to protect dividends and to safeguard against generic competitors undercutting their markets. No amount of public demonstrations or legal reforms will remedy this problem so long as the secular basis remains. A complete alternative basis and viewpoint is required.
Allah (swt) revealed Islam as a blessing and guide to mankind. The Islamic viewpoint made the pursuit of the pleasure of Allah (swt) the purpose of life. It was the pursuit of this goal that motivated the Islamic State to seek and provide the cure for diseases when the Messenger of Allah (saw) informed us that:
“There is no disease that Allah (swt) has created except that Allah (swt) has created a cure” – (narrated by Abu Hurairah in Bukhari)
The cure that was found was never considered the property of an individual or a particular business concern but was a mercy from Allah (swt) which was to be provided by the State to all. During the Khilafah of Harun al-Rashid (786- 809 CE) mobile clinics and hospitals were established and numerous schools of pharmacy and drug stores were opened to look after the affairs of the people. Medical research in Islam has a high and dignified position far removed from the selfish attitudes that we witness today. The famous and prominent mujtahid, Imam Shafi’i said about medicine: “After the science which distinguishes between what is halal and what is haram, I know of no science which is more noble than that of medicine.” Muslims excelled in the science of medicine. When al-Razi, the chief of the Baghdad hospital during the first quarter of the 10th Century, developed the use of seton in surgery and compiled a comprehensive medical encyclopædia he never patented his discoveries nor did Ibn Sina when he diagnosed bilharzias and described 760 different drugs. Because Islam doesn’t encourage the hoarding of medical knowledge famous works, like Ibn Sina’s al-Qanun (Canon of Medicine) and other works by the Muslim scientists formed the basis upon which Europe built its medical science. In fact, the principal medical books in Europe were from the Islamic State.
It is Allah (swt) who imparts knowledge and He (swt) decides how we use it.
“They said: Glory be to You, we have no knowledge except what You have taught us. Verily, it is You, the All-Knower, the All-Wise.” [al-Baqarah:32]
Only Islam is the effective remedy for the disease of secularism. And only via the return of the Khilafah and the comprehensive application of the Shari’ah can the cure be effectively administered.
Abu Saleh
Africa Correspondent
Source: Khilafah Journal
----------------------------------------------
I have to say that I wouldn't really put so much emphasis on the policies of American drug companies because as good as all major drug companies that I know of from around the world put profit before peoples lifes. But I do think that it is vital to think about these circumstances and maybe question the ethics behind those policies (if there are any).
In addition the author put too much emphasis on religion as being a solution. In my opinion the author should have focused more on the values we have in our modern society and question those, instead of praising a religion. Religion won't solve any problems, only humans can do so! Sure, we can use religion as a "fake" motivation, but so far religion brought so much misery & suffering to this world that I believe that we are better of without it. The motivation to be "good" to others should not come out of fear of some god but from the inner satisfaction experienced after simply helping somebody. I guess I'm going a bit too far now, anyway, I hope you know what I mean. Those are just my thoughts to this text & I'm sure a lot of you think about it differently.
Take action and visit: Oxfam's cut the Cost Campaign & send an email to Henry McKinnell, CEO & Chairman Pfizer Inc., to ask him to stop Pfizer putting patents bfore patients in poor countries.
another article by Oxfam on drug patents & their proposals
Gd nite & ~peace~