E-DRUG: Glaxo to pay $3 bn for largest health care fraud in US (12)
-------------------------------------------------------------------
[Wong is correct - which is why some colleagues were calling for 'punitive' sanctions - fines that would really hurt the business so that there would be more incentive for them to prevent/not take part in such activities. moderator]
Dear All
$3 billion is a lot of money but I am wondering how much GSK has 'earned' in
revenue from all the drugs mentioned in the time it has been in market.
Wong Wai See
Pharmacist
Hospital Pharmacy Services Section
Ministry of Health
Brunei Darussalam
ycwong@brunet.bn
E-DRUG: Glaxo to pay $3 bn for largest health care fraud in US (13)
-------------------------------------------------------------------
[Richmond's argument doesn't seem to be correct here. Patents are national, and it is up to the importing country to enforce patents, not the generic manufacturer. If referring to within India, under India's TRIPS compliant patent laws (since 2005) their manufacturers cannot produce patented medicines without agreement of the licence holder. Thus there does not seem to be an argument for intellectual property violations as claimed (unless Richmond or other colleagues would like to provide some examples). However, he is correct that generic manufacturers are also motivated by profit - but I don't think they use the argument that they are increasing access to medicines any more than the innovator companies do - and they too can be involved in unethical and/or illegal marketing practices of their products leading to problems of irrational use of medicines. DB]
Dear All,
When the big fishes are caught like GSK and Pfizer, they are fined albeit
inadequate deterrent for non disclosure of serious adverse effects. But what
happens to generic manufacturers of these medicines in countries like India
who export widely to developing countries in Africa. These manufacturers do
not wait for patency years to expire where probably post marketing serious
adverse events may be observed but immediately join the bandwagon of the
innovator companies soon after the new medicine is released to profit as
such. Who fines such companies in the developing world who will not respect
intellectual property rights but hide under the cloak of improving access to
medicines for the ordinary person but really seeks to profiteer?
Richmond Adusa-Poku
Ray Pharmacy
Asawasi, Kumasi
Ghana
00233-24-940624
adusapoku@yahoo.com
E-DRUG: Glaxo to pay $3 bn for largest health care fraud in US (14)
-------------------------------------------------------------------
[Apologies that the moderator's messages are longer than the post itself. Please keep reading.
E-Druggers are reminded that when submitting a message for posting on the forum they should ensure that they sign it with their name, affiliation and country. This is to help colleagues know who the message is from and put the question in context. Please observe this rule especially when using a mobile device. Moderator]
[WHO as a policy making body has guidelines on the ethical promotion of medicinal products
http://archives.who.int/tbs/promo/whozip08e.pdf
They have also maintain a database and have produced a summary of evidence together with Health Action International: 'Drug promotion, what we know, what we have yet to learn. Reviews of materials in the WHO/HAI database on drug promotion.'
http://apps.who.int/medicinedocs/pdf/s8109e/s8109e.pdf
Please fix URLs in browser if broken.
Other colleagues may wish to elaborate further - DB]
Dear All
In as much as I agree that patent laws are country based I would like to know the role of W.H.O on the GSK issues and others like that.
Koi Baryeh
albaryeh@yahoo.com
[signature added by moderator]