Copyright 2000 The Houston Chronicle Publishing Company
The Houston Chronicle
View Related Topics
January 31, 2000, Monday 3 STAR EDITION
SECTION: A; Pg. 21
LENGTH:
789 words
HEADLINE: Don't hamstring drug-makers in the
AIDS fight
BYLINE: NAOMI LOPEZ; Lopez
is director of the Center for Enterprise and Opportunity at the California-based
Pacific Research Institute.
BODY:
THE
AIDS epidemic is an ongoing tragedy, but some African leaders
and AIDS activists are now calling for plans that may worsen
the plight of present and future victims.
At a United Nations Security
Council meeting held earlier this month, some African leaders were calling on
the United States and other industrialized nations to make pharmaceutical
treatments accessible and cheaper for African nations.
Some are calling
on the United States to require pharmaceutical companies to lower their price on
AIDS drugs and to allow some nations to disregard patent and
trade protections in manufacturing generic alternatives. Before taking this
route, Americans should know what this could mean for the future of
AIDS treatments in the United States and around the world.
Under such a proposal, a third party could be permitted to manufacture a
drug without the permission of the patent owner. A patent is a legal title of
ownership for a specified amount of time over the intellectual
property used in the production or sale of an invention or discovery.
This would allow for the manufacture of a generic drug in a developing nation
before expiration of the owner's patent.
Given this tragic epidemic,
this seems to be a reasonable approach, but it presumes that companies should be
forced into the business of giving away their innovations and discoveries.
Profitable pharmaceutical companies are an easy target, but absent a profit
motive, companies would not be inclined to spend money on the research that
provides the innovations and life-saving treatments we see today.
According to the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America,
an industry trade association, more than 100 AIDS medications
and vaccines have been developed by almost 80 companies. There is strong reason
to believe that these AIDS treatments are far less important in
combating AIDS than are education efforts.
Community-based prevention, counseling and treatment programs have been
the most effective method of halting the rampant spread of HIV in the United
States, and the same has now been demonstrated in Africa. For
example, a 1999 report by UNAIDS, Acting Early to Prevent AIDS:
The Case of Senegal, documents that the HIV infection rate has remained
relatively low in Senegal while neighboring nations have seen massive outbreaks
of the virus.
Strong and concerted political, religious and community
leadership in Senegal's educational outreach efforts has contributed to the
suppression of the disease, which does not show signs of gaining ground.
First-time sexual activity occurs later in Senegal than in other countries,
condom use is relatively high and sexually transmitted diseases have been kept
at bay. Senegal's early and sustained prevention efforts provide a strong
example of a comprehensive, long-term strategy. Some pharmaceutical companies
are already involved in such constructive approaches.
Through both the
International Federation of Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Associations and PhRMA,
pharmaceutical companies' donations to the AIDS fight in
sub-Saharan Africa are significant and comprise 30 to 70
percent of the available health care in some African nations.
One
example is Bristol-Myers Squibb. According to PhRMA, the pharmaceutical giant is
training more than 200 African physicians, is funding AIDS
research trials and is working with nongovernmental organizations to strengthen
AIDS treatment and awareness programs. This effort is taking
place in five southern African countries, over five years and at a cost of more
than $ 100 million. It comes in addition to government-sponsored foreign medical
aid and the efforts of private voluntary organizations.
Many people will be surprised to learn that the United States is already
involved in efforts to combat AIDS in Africa.
In fact, Vice President Al Gore proposed that the United States contribute an
additional $ 150 million to the current efforts.
Americans should
publicly debate the U.S. government's activities, demand more transparency and
accountability for the government's current efforts, and consider the
implications for pharmaceutical innovation and development.
How much
aid is appropriate? What are the best strategies for addressing
the crisis? And should African nations have more or less flexibility in
directing aid to health-care concerns?
Resolving these
questions would allow taxpayers, lawmakers and the media more opportunities to
publicly consider the best approaches to crafting a more comprehensive strategy.
This would provide for more accountability on the part of lawmakers and those
receiving assistance, without jeopardizing intellectual
property rights and progress toward more effective drug treatments.
GRAPHIC: Drawing
TYPE:
Editorial Opinion
LOAD-DATE: February 1, 2000
