E-drug: Re: US compusory licensing proposal for medicines (cont)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear E-druggers,
Talleyrand is quoted as having said that every exaggeration tends to
be insignificant, and to my opinion John Urquhart is destroying his
own arguments by mentioning a number of examples. I had my
training in internal medicine between 1957 and 1963, and of all
those drugs mentioned streptomycin, isoniazid, tetracyclines,
corticosteroids, erythromycin, halothane, l-dopa, methyldopa, reserpine,
furosemide, nystatin, were around, widely used and readily
available. The beta-blockers and the H2-blockers were no industrial
inventions (Jim Black), nor was taxol (NIH/NCI). The same applies to
the statins and the ACE inhibitors (invented by Japanese
academics). It is a fable that ranitidine is so much worse than
cimetidine, because the interaction problem is mainly theoretical. [Leo: I
think you mean the other way around, cimetidine not being so much worse
than ranitidine. KM, moderator]. Some of the so-called "improved" me-too's
represented minor
advances at a much higher price. Antiplatelet agents? The best and
cheapest one is still aspirin....
I have traveled widely in Eastern Europe during the last ten years,
and the theoretical comparison of a Western market with free
competition after 1962 with the situation in the Soviet Union and
satellite countries is wholly beside the point. There was no incentive
to make new drugs because the level of medical care was awfully
low and 25% of the BNP went to defence.
How many "new" drugs were added to the original WHO Essential
Drugs list since the first edition? Is there any statistical proof that the
"newer" drugs have improved overall data of life expectancy and
morbidity? On the contrary, we now have the HIV-epidemic, malaria
is worse than ever and tbc has returned. In 1962 nobody had ever
heard about MRSA! Perhaps one could make an exception for the
oral contraceptives, but that market is firmly in the hand of 3 firms.
I fully agree that pharmaceutical research has brought some
benefits for the happy (very) few who can pay for the new drugs
(i.e. the US and the European market) and where a minor new
indication has been discovered. If the Americans want to pay
"through their noses" for the most simple drugs (go to a US
supermarket and look at the prices) it is their business, but don't tell
the rest of the world that the US pharmaceutical industry would
collapse as a consequence of compulsory licensing and lower
prices. What about the salaries of the "captains of industry" in this
business? In the Dutch press the new word "cleptocrat" was used.
Good luck and best wishes.
Dr.L.Offerhaus
Koedijklaan 1a, NL-1406KW Bussum, The Netherlands
Phone: +31-35-6923288. Fax: +31-35-6923290
E-mail: LO@EURONET.NL CompuServe disconnected from 1/3/2001
--
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'.