'Gleevec, which made almost $5 billion for Novartis last year, has been at the center of a long battle between pharmaceutical companies and activists fighting price increases. The drug cost about $26,000 per year in 2001, and Novartis repeatedly raised the price even as competitors emerged; early this year, it was more than $120,000. Those who support broader access to medicines argue that poor countries should reject patents and make generic versions of leukemia drugs. In 2013, India’s highest court struck down Novartis’s patent application for Gleevec, opening the way for generics. They now cost about $400 a year in India and about $9,000 in Canada."
Issues and developments related to ethics, information, and technologies, examined in the ethics and intellectual property graduate courses I teach at the University of Pittsburgh School of Computing and Information. My Bloomsbury book "Ethics, Information, and Technology" will be published in Summer 2025. Kip Currier, PhD, JD
Showing posts with label access to medicines. Show all posts
Showing posts with label access to medicines. Show all posts
Wednesday, November 30, 2016
Summer Project Turns Into Leukemia Testing Breakthrough; New York Times, 11/28/16
Donald G. McNeil Jr., New York Times; Summer Project Turns Into Leukemia Testing Breakthrough:
Friday, August 26, 2016
Wednesday, May 25, 2016
Unaffordable Medicines Now Global Issue; System Needs Change, Panellists Say; Intellectual Property Watch, 5/25/16
Catherine Saez, Intellectual Property Watch; Unaffordable Medicines Now Global Issue; System Needs Change, Panellists Say:
"At a side event to this week’s annual World Health Assembly, a member of the Netherlands Ministry of Health delivered an unexpected speech on access to medicines, calling for more clarity in the setting of medicine prices, looking inside and outside of the patent system for solutions, and praising de-linkage. Other panellists viewed partnerships as a key ingredient to fill research and development gaps. And a representative from the Gates Foundation advised against a hasty switch to new system."
Wednesday, April 13, 2016
Lifting the Patent Barrier to New Drugs and Energy Sources; New York Times, 4/12/16
Eduardo Porter, New York Times; Lifting the Patent Barrier to New Drugs and Energy Sources:
"Malaria has preyed on humans for centuries. Hundreds of thousands of children die each year from the disease. Considering the market’s size, why haven’t pharmaceutical companies rushed to develop a vaccine against the deadly parasite that causes it? The answer is easy: There is no money to be made from a vaccine for poor children who could not possibly pay for inoculation. Last year, GlaxoSmithKline finally introduced the world’s first malaria vaccine for large pilot tests among African children. The move, however, is not an endorsement of the profit motive as a spur for innovation. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation picked up much of the tab. And Glaxo does not expect to make money on its investment. The lack of interest of the pharmaceutical industry, which generates huge profits protected by a web of patents enforced around the world, raises an important question. Do we need a different way to spur innovation and disseminate new technologies quickly around the world? Are patents, which reward inventors by providing them with a government-guaranteed monopoly over their inventions for many years, the best way to encourage new inventions?"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)