Background: My mom was a student of law and dad, a student of pharmacy who is now a quasi-judiciary authority with legal powers and know-how.
The recent judgement ruling out a patent for Glivec- a cancer drug, saw adequate coverage on MSM and my TL on twitter discussed it at length. I understood some it, some of it went over my head like a Shoaib Akthar bouncer.
So, I asked my parents what this meant and how it would affect the common man. I will attempt to put before you a few self-explanatory points that form the summary of this discussion.
1. Drugs (Medicines) are of many kinds, but those that prolong/save the lives of people on their deathbeds hold a special place.
2. The Indian constitution promises every tax-paying (or otherwise) citizen the right to life and good health. It is the duty of the government to look after its citizens in health and illness. (I made it sound like we're married to the GOI no? ewwww)
3. The aforementioned drug is being used by government agencies, smaller hospitals, NGOs, etc in its generic form. The patent would cause the withdrawal of these generic (read affordable) drugs from the market.
4. Glivec is but the tip of the iceberg. There are, dad's estimation not mine, close to 30 such drugs that are equally or more important and expensive that would've cited this judgement as an example and claimed patents had this ruling gone in the way of Novartis.
5. I saw people claiming that Novartis has funded 95% of the patients using this drug. these are unfounded, cooked numbers. We wouldn't be struggling to eradicate some very easy-to-eradicate diseases had the pharmaceutical companies been as ethical as they claim to be.
6. I observed many people observing that this judgement would discourage pharmaceutical companies from investing in R&D. This is absolutely true. However, this is not something sudden and unprecedented. The law which restricts the pricing of drugs and gives the governmental agencies control over pricing came into existence in 1970 and was amended twice, once in 75 (or 77) and the latest amendment being made in 1995. This law had, already, done most of the damage and the industry stopped investing in drugs with low ROI. In fact, they even reduced the production of some of the most vital drugs due to low profit margins.
So, yes, this will discourage them further, but the damage was done before most of the people who read this post were even born.
My take: We dodged a bullet. The government is trying very hard to provide as many people with treatment and healthcare. I am usually cynical about such things and so is the general public. Our image of a government hospital is a dirty place filled with quacks who will inject you with infected needles. It matters not that you and I think so, because we can, by hook or crook, afford private healthcare. Those who absolutely cannot afford healthcare try to avoid government too. But when they do, they deserve the best possible treatment that the government can afford. This judgement will keep these big MNCs from dictating terms and prices. There is a higher probability of lives being saved. We should be happy and proud of the judiciary in this case.
P.S: If you have specific doubts that are more technical or even #Deep in nature. Feel free to leave a comment or tweet to me @suar4sure . I hope this helped.
The recent judgement ruling out a patent for Glivec- a cancer drug, saw adequate coverage on MSM and my TL on twitter discussed it at length. I understood some it, some of it went over my head like a Shoaib Akthar bouncer.
So, I asked my parents what this meant and how it would affect the common man. I will attempt to put before you a few self-explanatory points that form the summary of this discussion.
1. Drugs (Medicines) are of many kinds, but those that prolong/save the lives of people on their deathbeds hold a special place.
2. The Indian constitution promises every tax-paying (or otherwise) citizen the right to life and good health. It is the duty of the government to look after its citizens in health and illness. (I made it sound like we're married to the GOI no? ewwww)
3. The aforementioned drug is being used by government agencies, smaller hospitals, NGOs, etc in its generic form. The patent would cause the withdrawal of these generic (read affordable) drugs from the market.
4. Glivec is but the tip of the iceberg. There are, dad's estimation not mine, close to 30 such drugs that are equally or more important and expensive that would've cited this judgement as an example and claimed patents had this ruling gone in the way of Novartis.
5. I saw people claiming that Novartis has funded 95% of the patients using this drug. these are unfounded, cooked numbers. We wouldn't be struggling to eradicate some very easy-to-eradicate diseases had the pharmaceutical companies been as ethical as they claim to be.
6. I observed many people observing that this judgement would discourage pharmaceutical companies from investing in R&D. This is absolutely true. However, this is not something sudden and unprecedented. The law which restricts the pricing of drugs and gives the governmental agencies control over pricing came into existence in 1970 and was amended twice, once in 75 (or 77) and the latest amendment being made in 1995. This law had, already, done most of the damage and the industry stopped investing in drugs with low ROI. In fact, they even reduced the production of some of the most vital drugs due to low profit margins.
So, yes, this will discourage them further, but the damage was done before most of the people who read this post were even born.
My take: We dodged a bullet. The government is trying very hard to provide as many people with treatment and healthcare. I am usually cynical about such things and so is the general public. Our image of a government hospital is a dirty place filled with quacks who will inject you with infected needles. It matters not that you and I think so, because we can, by hook or crook, afford private healthcare. Those who absolutely cannot afford healthcare try to avoid government too. But when they do, they deserve the best possible treatment that the government can afford. This judgement will keep these big MNCs from dictating terms and prices. There is a higher probability of lives being saved. We should be happy and proud of the judiciary in this case.
P.S: If you have specific doubts that are more technical or even #Deep in nature. Feel free to leave a comment or tweet to me @suar4sure . I hope this helped.
I was half a pharma student and a desperately wanted to be a law student. Probably that's why this case interests me so much. It does seem that the judgement is in favour of the greater common good.
ReplyDeleteBut I also wonder if the real beneficiaries are the other Indian pharma cos and not the actual patients. Won't this stop the 95% from getting the free drugs? (If Novartis is to be believed, and I believe them)
Also, they say that the patent was on a drug that was modified just a bit. So does that mean that there is a generic drug that was already doing the same work as Glivec? If yes,what is the whole point in this lawsuit?
And yes, I now understand how we will lose because foreign drug companies will not invest in R&D. And you say that this is not something that was caused due to this particular judgement. So maybe it is time for the government to chip in some more and invest in R&D instead of ,well, many other useless things.