A group of experts calling for a global treaty to stop the lethal trade
in fake medicines has been barred from attending a World Health Organisation
meeting, highlighting deep divisions that are blocking progress on the subject.
Leading academics and health professionals hoped to provoke debate on
the need for a new international law to prevent falsified and substandard drugs
reaching the market with a paper published in the British Medical Journal on
Wednesday. Their article, which sets out a clear case for a fake drugs treaty
similar to existing ones on money laundering and human trafficking, comes a
week before 100 states hold the first meeting of its kind to discuss the
problem in Buenos Aires.
But lead author Amir Attaran of the University of Ottawa said he was
told on Monday by the World Health Organisation (WHO) that he and other
non-governmental representatives could not attend, following an objection by
India. A WHO spokeswoman declined to comment on the details of particular
invitations but said it was up to member states to determine who was permitted
to attend. Indian officials, whose government is wary of multinational drug
firms using the issue to curb competition, were not immediately available for comment.
Attaran called it a "scandal" that only government officials
would be at the meeting in Argentina to discuss strategy. The clash exposes
distrust among governments, the pharmaceutical industry and healthcare
campaigners about how to tackle fake and dangerous medicines, which are a
growing problem in both poor countries and rich. Risks include ineffective
material packaged as medication and real drugs made in poor conditions.
In developing countries, the WHO estimates that more than 10 percent of
medicine may be fake or substandard, with bogus malaria drugs a particular
threat in parts of Asia and Africa. But the danger is real in the rich world,
too. Earlier this year, fake vials of Roche's cancer drug Avastin were found in
the United States, while a recent U.S. meningitis outbreak, due to contaminated
steroid injections, shows the country is not immune to quality problems. In the
European Union, medicines are now the top illicit product seized at the border
and authorities have found fake versions of drugs purporting to come from
companies including Sanofi, Eli Lilly and AstraZeneca.
LAW TOUGHER ON
TOBACCO THAN FAKE DRUGS
The need for action seems clear enough - but advancing the debate
involves navigating some big divides. India, whose large drugs industry
produces cheap generic versions, is concerned that Western governments backed
by Big Pharma are using the fight against fakes as a cover to restrict trade in
unpatented medicines much needed by the world's poor. Some health activists
support New Delhi's charge that worries about counterfeit drugs are being
hijacked by "Big Pharma" global pharmaceutical companies to protect
their profits and patented products against legitimate generic competitors.
In east Africa, for example, international drug companies have taken
advantage of anti-counterfeiting laws that are sometimes poorly drafted to curb
sales of otherwise legitimate generics, threatening the availability of
essential drugs. India is particularly resistant to any role for pharmaceutical
firms in setting the agenda, and Brazil has expressed similar concerns in the
past.
Given the distrust, the authors of the paper in the BMJ - who include
leaders of nursing, pharmacy and public health bodies - argue there is a need
to find neutral ground to address what appears to be a gaping hole in
international law. They point out that thanks to a new convention on tobacco
control, international law is now tougher on counterfeit cigarettes than it is
on fake medicines. "We hope that this will form the basis for getting some
consensus on a definition of counterfeit drugs, which would then be
transferable into a legal instrument," said another of the paper's
authors, Martin McKee of the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. The
lack of a treaty means there is no agreement on which medicines are illegal and
criminals can do business in countries where laws or enforcement are lax. There
is also no requirement for police and prosecutors to co-operate across borders.
Source: Chicago Tribune
Please share
No comments:
Post a Comment