[e-drug] MSF proposals for the 54th World Health Assembly

E-drug: MSF proposals for the 54th World Health Assembly
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Dear e-druggers,
     
     please find below the text of recommendations for WHO from the MSF
     Access to Essential Medicines Campaign at the 54th World Health
     Assembly. This text is also available in English and French (with
     charts) on our website (www.accessmed-msf.org) as a downloadable Word
     file.
          
     Suerie Moon
     Editor
     Access to Essential Medicines Campaign
     M�decins Sans Fronti�res (MSF)
     rue du Lac 12
     CP 6090
     1207 Geneva
     Switzerland
     tel: +41 (22) 849 84 01
     fax: +41 (22) 849 84 04
     access-com@geneva.msf.org
     www.accessmed.msf.org
     --------
     
     ACCESS TO ESSENTIAL MEDICINES:
     CAN THE WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION DO MORE?
     M�decins Sans Fronti�res Briefing for the 54th World Health Assembly
     
     Introduction
     M�decins Sans Fronti�res (MSF) has been campaigning since 1999 to
     improve access to essential medicines. For years, we have had to
     watch our patients die for lack of effective, affordable drugs. MSF
     is encouraged to see that in the last year the World Health
     Organization (WHO) has made significant progress towards addressing
     this crisis. WHO has begun discussions to reform the process of
     updating the Model List of Essential Drugs (EDL), created a database
     of information on drug prices with other UN agencies, and become more
     involved in trade issues that impact health.
     
     However, as the world's leading health agency, and armed with the
     clear mandate of recent WHA resolutions, WHO can and should do much
     more. In particular, MSF calls on WHO to advocate more vocally for
     public health concerns at the World Trade Organization (WTO) and its
     TRIPS Council(1); to defend more staunchly the rights of Member States
     to incorporate measures in their legislation that protect access to
     medicines, (such as compulsory licensing, parallel imports, and
     measures to accelerate the introduction of generics (2)); and to
     develop a clearer vision on global equity pricing(3) for essential
     medicines. In addition, Member States should support ongoing WHO
     efforts to expand the EDL to include therapeutically essential drugs
     previously excluded because of high cost.
          
     Stronger role for WHO needed at WTO and TRIPS Council
     The adoption of the Revised Drug Strategy Resolution by the WHA in
     1999 (WHA52.19) marked a major turning point in WHO's work on access
     to medicines. Member States explicitly expanded WHO's mandate to
     include monitoring and analysing the public health implications of
     trade agreements (specifically TRIPS), and supporting Member States in
     addressing concerns about the effects of these agreements on access to
     medicines.
     
     But has WHO done enough? As noted in its report on the Revised Drug
     Strategy (A54/17), "after a two-year process, WTO's TRIPS Council
     accorded WHO observer status on an ad hoc basis." While "observer
     status" signifies some progress, WHO should not merely play the role
     of observer, but rather, should actively advocate for public health
     when it is affected by trade policies. WHO should increase its
     capacity, which is currently insufficient, to support Member States in
     implementing TRIPS with the highest protection for public health, by
     helping countries make full use of the flexibility in the Agreement.
     The upcoming TRIPS Council meeting in June will provide WHO a good
     opportunity to promote a public health perspective on issues currently
     under debate. MSF urges WHO to back strategies that ensure that
     protection of health takes precedence over protection of intellectual
     property rights. (For specific recommendations, see p.4)
          
     Wanted: equity pricing
     Over the past year, global equity pricing policies that would mean
     lower prices for essential medicines in developing countries have
     gained momentum and support from all sectors, including industrialised
     and developing countries, drugmakers, and civil society. Recently,
     WHO and WTO jointly hosted a meeting in Norway to discuss differential
     pricing, but achieved few concrete results. Many questions remain
     unanswered about WHO's vision on differential pricing, and how a
     differential pricing system can contribute to making drugs truly
     affordable: Will it include all developing countries? Will it include
     generic manufacturers, or only the proprietary drug industry? Will it
     rely on individual negotiations with drugmakers or set up a
     transparent, global system?
     
     A differential pricing system will not be enough to achieve the goal
     of equity pricing. Differential pricng will only be effective if it
     is part of a more comprehensive system that includes generic
     competition, global/regional procurement and distribution, local
     production through voluntary licensing and technology transfer, and
     donor support. In short, medicines will not be made affordable
     through one single strategy. Rather, a combination of
     mutually-supportive measures is required. (See chart below.) WHO
     should also support countries in procuring affordable medicines by
     identifying quality producers through a pre-qualification process,
     where appropriate.
     
     Generic competition is one of the key factors in bringing prices down
     on a sustainable basis. The dramatic fall in prices of AIDS drugs,
     from over $10,000 per patient/year for triple therapy to as low as
     $347 in one year, provides strong evidence of the need and efficacy of
     competitive pressure:
          
     Next steps for the Essential Drugs List (EDL)
     The EDL is one of the most important public health tools, promoting
     access to needed medicines and their rational selection and use. WHO
     has reported that various changes to the process of updating the EDL
     are under consideration, including "application review procedures and
     reporting to be standardized and made transparent; selection of
     essential drugs to be closely linked to WHO treatment guidelines;
     decisions on inclusion to be based on evidence rather than consensus;
     evaluation of safety and efficacy to be separated from cost
     considerations; continual rather than two-yearly updates; and
     electronic publication in all major languages." MSF welcomes these
     suggestions as necessary and effective measures for ensuring that the
     EDL is primarily a medical tool, and particularly welcomes the fact
     that expensive drugs will no longer be excluded from the list solely
     because of price.
     
     The expansion of the EDL should go hand-in-hand with measures to
     ensure that these medicines become affordable and available. WHO
     should support policies that reduce the prices of essential medicines
     that are currently too expensive for developing countries.
          
     Recommendations for WHO
     
     To advocate more vocally for public health concerns at the WTO and
     TRIPS Council, WHO should:
     1. Develop a strategy to monitor the potentially negative impacts of
     TRIPS on public health.
     2. Advocate for extending TRIPS implementation deadlines for
     developing countries until the Agreement's impact on health can be
     thoroughly evaluated.
     3. Articulate the public health benefits of policies that accelerate
     the introduction of generics, including both Bolar provisions and
     limits on anti-competitive levels of data exclusivity.
     4. Report on the failure of TRIPS to stimulate research and
     development (R&D) of drugs for diseases that primarily affect
     developing countries. Propose alternative methods for stimulating
     such R&D and ensuring equitable access to its end products.
     5. Provide Member States with model laws and regulations on compulsory
     licensing and other legal measures to improve access to expensive
     medications.
     6. Analyse the public health benefits of allowing the export of drugs
     produced under compulsory license, so that this measure can benefit
     developing countries both with and without production capacity.
     
     To promote equity pricing, WHO should:
     7. Actively pursue a global policy of equity pricing for essential
     medicines through a mix of mutually-supportive strategies, including
     generic competition, differential pricing of branded drugs, global
     procurement and distribution, and local production.
     8. Support countries in procuring affordable medicines by identifying
     quality producers through a pre-qualification process, where
     appropriate.
     
     To maximise the value of the Essential Drugs List, WHO should:
     9. Strengthen the WHO Model List of Essential Drugs with a list of
     therapeutically essential medicines that are not yet included because
     of price, then support measures to reduce the prices of these
     medicines.
     10. Expand its work on a database of prices for medicines, and
     particularly, add information on their patent status to enable Member
     States to identify affordable quality sources of essential drugs.
          
     NOTES:
     1. The body that is responsible for monitoring the operation of the
     Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights
     (TRIPS), and in particular, how WTO members comply with their
     obligations under it.
     
     2. Also known as Bolar provisions.
     
     3. MSF will use the term "equity pricing" to describe pricing policies
     that ensure that, from the point of view of the community and the
     individual, the price of a drug is fair, equitable and affordable,
     even for a poor population and/or the health system that serves them.
     Equity pricing is based on the principle that the poor should pay less
     for, and have access to products such as essential medicines. The
     terms "differential pricing," "preferential pricing" and "tiered
     pricing" are also often used to describe lower prices for low-income
     populations, but they do not necessarily result in affordability or
     equitable access to a product. Rather, they are commercial terms for
     pricing practices aimed at maximising the income of the seller. While
     differential, preferential or tiered pricing may lead to equitable
     access to medicines, they do not necessarily mean that even the lowest
     prices charged will be affordable.

--
Send mail for the `E-Drug' conference to `e-drug@usa.healthnet.org'.
Information and archive http://www.healthnet.org/programs/edrug.html
Mail administrative requests to `majordomo@usa.healthnet.org'.
For additional assistance, send mail to: `owner-e-drug@usa.healthnet.org'.