Lisa Richwine for Reuters: Groups Say U.S. Hurts World Access To AIDS Drugs

[James Love <love@cptech.org>]

http://dailynews.yahoo.com/headlines/sc/story.html?s=v/nm/19990411/sc/health_aids_1.html


Sunday April 11 9:56 AM ET 

Groups Say U.S. Hurts World Access To AIDS Drugs

By Lisa Richwine

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. government, on behalf of drug companies,
is bullying developing countries into abandoning a trade remedy that
could help them fight the escalating AIDS
epidemic, health and consumer groups say.

Organizations from the United States and abroad, including the
humanitarian group Doctors Without Borders, say U.S. officials have
threatened trade sanctions against countries that could benefit from a
little-known practice called compulsory licensing. Supporters say such
licenses could help poor countries gain access to cheaper AIDS drugs.

Pharmaceutical companies in the United States oppose compulsory
licensing and have lobbied U.S. trade officials to discourage it in
order to protect companies' patents on AIDS drugs.

The drug companies say they need a certain level of profit to finance
further research, but one of the drugs sought was developed by U.S.
government research and the patent is still held by the Clinton
administration.

AIDS is rampaging through Africa and some Asian nations. Health experts
say 12 million people have died from the disease in sub-Saharan Africa,
with infection rates running as high as 25 percent in some countries.

AIDS activists, consumer groups and physicians say compulsory licenses
may be one means of helping narrow the gap between those who can afford
AIDS treatments and those who cannot.

``It wouldn't solve all the problems,'' said James Love, director of the
Consumer Project on Technology, a U.S.-based consumer group. ``But it
might keep a lot of people alive until a new generation of drugs
appears.''

Under world trade rules governing intellectual property, compulsory
licenses allow companies to make cheaper, generic versions of AIDS drug,
even while the drugs' makers hold exclusive patent
rights to the medications.

Countries must prove a license would serve a public need, such as health
care, and the patent holder must receive ''adequate'' payment. Disputes
have been settled by respective countries' courts.

The licenses were first adopted by many countries in the 1883 Paris
Convention as a check on the patent holder, who was viewed as holding a
monopoly on a particular product. They are now included in World Trade
Organization rules. The United States has issued compulsory licenses for
satellite technology, television programming, music and other goods.

Now, health groups around the world have seized on compulsory licenses
as a way to provide lower cost treatments to millions of AIDS sufferers
in countries such as South Africa and Thailand.

About 60 nongovernmental organizations that gathered in Geneva last
month criticized U.S. policy on the licenses, and U.S.-based health and
labor groups are joining AIDS groups such as ACT-UP for a rally and
march in downtown Washington, D.C., later this month.

They also have support on Capitol Hill. Representative Jesse Jackson
Jr., an Illinois Democrat, has introduced legislation that would forbid
the Clinton administration from retaliating against any
African countries that seek compulsory licenses.

In Thailand, health advocates urged the government to seek a license for
ddI, or didanosine. The U.S. government holds the patent on the drug,
which is sold by Bristol Myers Squibb for slightly more per day than the
average daily wage in Thailand, said Dr. Bernard Pecoul, director of
Doctors Without Borders.

``One of the solutions to this problem would be for the Thai government
to use compulsory licenses,'' Pecoul said in a phone interview. ``But
the Thai government was under strong pressure from the U.S. Embassy to
not use compulsory licenses.''

A spokeswoman for Health Secretary Donna Shalala, who technically holds
the ddI patent, said the agency was reviewing the situation. The U.S.
Trade Representative's office said it could not confirm whether U.S.
officials had pressured foreign countries to forego compulsory licenses.

But U.S. Patent and Trademark Office officials said the United States
has made its opposition clear in bilateral negotiations with other
countries.

``We do not think compulsory licensing is necessary,'' patent official
Lois Boland said. ``We do not support them in general.''

Drug makers say losing some patent protection could discourage new drug
development by pharmaceutical companies, who have spent up to $1 billion
developing a single AIDS drug.

``The period of market exclusivity is something promised to the
inventor,'' said Tom Bombelles, assistant vice president for the
Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America. ``A compulsory
license is a form of breaking that promise.''

Pharmaceutical companies are working with the United Nations to find
ways to make AIDS drugs available in poor countries, Bombelles added.

Even with compulsory licenses, foreign countries may find manufacturing
AIDS drugs too complex. And just making inexpensive drugs available in
poorer countries does not guarantee results.

Many developing countries do not have the tools to make sure people get
the drugs and take them, according to U.S. patent officials and drug
makers.

``One of the fallacies of the compulsory licensing approach is that all
you have to do is give people some pills,'' Bombelles said. ``That's
just wrong.''

Compulsory licensing advocates acknowledge they would not be a magic
bullet for stemming the worldwide AIDS crisis. But they say they could
be a start.

``Once that hurdle is eliminated, the remaining complexities are more
easily addressed,'' AIDS activist Eric Sawyer said.