[Ip-health] WHO's Quick calls for limits on disease coverage in article in the Scientist on Lamy proposal

[James Love]

This is quite shocking to me.  In the Scientist, Jono Quick from the WHO
is now calling for limitations on the scope of disease coverage for the
para 6 solution.  What next, limitations on the scope of compulsory
licensing or the bolar provisions?    Jono can you explain this for
ip-health?  Will the WHO propose exclusion of drugs like Glivec with are
priced at $160 per day, for rare forms of Leukemia?  Why?  Jamie


---------------
"We don't want [this agreement] to cover every disease" said Quick. "The
point is that there needs to be flexibility, with an evidence-based
assessment based on the national morbidity etc."


"Basically the concern of some countries," says Jonathan Quick, Director
of WHO's Department of Essential Drugs and Medicines Policy, "is that it
<an unrestricted list> is an open door to break all patents, and what's
needed is an assurance that it won't be. And the question is what can
provide the assurance. The EU's hope is that WHO could provide enough
reassurance that things can proceed."

=3D

http://www.biomedcentral.com/news/20030110/05

January 10, 2003

EU seeks WHO help in affordable medicine dispute
Trade commissioner urges ministers to take advice from WHO and so break
Doha deadlock . | By Robert Walgate

In a letter to trade ministers of the World Trade Organisation, European
Union trade commissioner, Pascal Lamy, proposed yesterday that taking
advice from the WHO would be one way to solve a long standing
international trade dispute about access by developing countries to
affordable medicine.

At issue is the question of whether poor countries will be able legally
to import cheap, generic copies of drugs from non-patent holders when a
WTO agreement =97 Trade Related Aspects of International Property =97 comes
into full force in 2005. For several years trade officials have
struggled to reach an agreement about what will happen then. The most
recent =97 failed =97 attempt was last December when the US was willing to
agree to such imports only if the generics related to a restricted list
of diseases, including HIV/AIDS, malaria and TB, but excluding large
classes of drugs for other conditions such as cancer. Vaccines and other
products of the pharmaceutical industry were also excluded.

"Basically the concern of some countries," says Jonathan Quick, Director
of WHO's Department of Essential Drugs and Medicines Policy, "is that it
<an unrestricted list> is an open door to break all patents, and what's
needed is an assurance that it won't be. And the question is what can
provide the assurance. The EU's hope is that WHO could provide enough
reassurance that things can proceed."

However, Quick is not happy with a fixed list. "We'd like a solution
that's sufficiently robust that it's good 10, 20, 30 years from now.
Disease patterns shift with time =97 no one was predicting AIDS 25 years
ago =97 so "from a public health point of view you'd like a flexible
agreement," he says.

The EU's proposed solution is that If a country considers it needs to
import generics for some condition, WHO's role would be to provide
evidence and advice on the magnitude if the disease, and to recommend
treatment =96 "on or off patent". The legal steps would then be up to WTO.

"We don't want [this agreement] to cover every disease" said Quick. "The
point is that there needs to be flexibility, with an evidence-based
assessment based on the national morbidity etc."

Links for this article
World Trade Organisation
http://www.wto.org

European Union
http://www.europa.eu.int

WHO
http://www.who.int