[Ip-health] Article published in the page "opinion" of Jornal do Brasil by the president of the Brazilian Federation of Pharmaceutical Industry

[access@msf.org.br]

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]

 Aids, cocktail and social inequity




During the recent meeting that took place in Curitiba, NGOs requested
again the CL of the drugs of the anti-aids cocktail.



Unfortunatly, the question went way further than the financial limits
that initially gave the grounds for the action, which is try to reduce
the price of medicines, having in mind that the public funds wouldn't be
sufficient to attend the increasing number of patients, and turned into
a campaign of disinformation, with the objective of discredit the
pharmaceutical industry.



It's a pity that a theme of such gravity is being treated in such an
inconsequent way.



The ones in favor of the disrespect of Intellectual Property argue that
the medicines are very expensive and that countries like Brazil don't
have the financial conditions to pay the price. Really, products which
Research and Development (R&D) cost an average of US$ 900 millions are
expensive. And the high investments made to create them need to be
covered, as the economic logic imposes. And so they are. By the markets
of the rich countries.



The consumer and the Brazilian government already pay for the medicines
they acquire a subsidized price by the north American, European and
Japanese consumers.



Conveniently, the ones in favor of the break of patents use to include
Brazil in the group of poor countries. Brazil is, in fact, the 12th
world economy. But it doesn't pay for the anti-aids drugs of the
cocktail a price equivalent to its position. It pays proportionally much
less.



On the other hand, countries recognized as poor, as most African
countries, don't pay anything or very little for the drugs against aids,
for instance.



What happens is that the humanitarian help for Africa, that includes
donation of medicines in high quantities, is diverted by technocrats and
by the corruption networks, according to the analysis of the unsuspected
African economist James Shikwati, of Kenya, in interview of the German
magazine Der Spiegel.



The problem of access to medicines in Brazil is not centered on price,
but on income. And there is no novelty in saying that. A UM report that
just got released show that Brazil stands at the 8th position of social
inequity in the world. The bad income distribution and precarious public
policies refrain the access of the population to essential goods, such
as medicines.

The anti-aids medicines developed by the pharmaceutical industry
throughout the last two decades gave new hope to the ones with the
diseases. The molecules discovered transformed the illness, initially
fatal and devastating, into a controlled illness, although incurable,
increasing the quality of life and the life expectancy of the HIV+
people.



And there are people saying that the success of the Brazilian Program of
universal distribution of medicines to fight aids is due exclusively to
the government initiatives and not to the pharmaceutical industry. Well,
the strategy to negotiate with the labs a price reduction of anti-aids
drugs or to produce locally products whose patents are expired would not
be worth anything without the willingness and the risk taking of the
labs to mobilize billions of dollars in the discovery of molecules able
to reduce the mortality caused by the illness.

Without research and development of innovative medicines against aids,
the public Program of treatment of aids patients simply would not exist.




Even though it might sound absurd, some defenders of the break of
patents even go as far as saying things such as: "the simple existence
of anti-aids medicines don't guarantee life". Medicines guarantee, yes,
the life of a increasing contingent of Brazilians.



The success of the Brazilian program of universal access to anti-aids
cocktail is the success of the pharmaceutical industry, whether on the
scientific plan or commercial plan. The data's of the government
illustrate this affirmation.



In 1997, 35,9 thousand people with aid were attended, with the spending
per capita of US$ 6.240. Last year, the group of beneficiaries reached
154 thousand people, with spending per patient of US$ 2.500. In 2003,
the average cost per person was even lower: US$ 1.359.



The fact that the responsible for the Brazilian program of fight against
aids want to optimize the available resources is comprehensible and even
legitimate. The laboratories have played the game, negotiating more
favorable conditions, as the above numbers show.



What is not acceptable is that, in the name of this objective, the
laboratories are treated as the bad guys in a Program that is being
applauded in the whole world thanks, fundamentally, to the knowledge and
huge investment of the pharmaceutical industry.



The sector reaffirms its commitment to contribute to the scaling up of
the access to medicines for medicines in general and not only for
anti-aids cocktail. It only has one condition. That everything is made
within the law, respecting international agreement signed by Brazil.



*Ciro Mortella is executive president of the Brazilian Federation of
Pharmaceutical Industry (Febrafarma)

--