[Ip-health] U.S. Pres. candidate on Thailand & global framework

[Benjamin Krohmal]

This is by former U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services and
potential Republican Presidential candidate Tommy Thompson.  Much of
the piece is what one might expect, but very importantly, Thompson
endorses a new global framework that balances innovation and access:

<In this increasingly complex environment governments also have a
duty to talk and exercise diplomacy to address not only this symptom,
but to put into place a framework that considers the larger global
public health need -- the balancing act between innovation and access.>


Market Watch
http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/commentary-need-medical-
diplomacy-growing/story.aspx?guid=%7B310AEA38-3BF5-4676-
B7B2-529B847E84DF%7D


Shrugging diplomatic responsibility
Commentary: Thailand compulsory licensing symptomatic of greater problem

By Tommy Thompson
Last Update: 8:25 AM ET Mar 23, 2007

Editor's note: This is an update to note Thompson's political
aspirations. Tommy Thompson is a partner at the U.S. law firm of Akin
Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld and is the former U.S. Secretary of Health
and Human Services and four-term Governor of Wisconsin. He has formed
a committee to explore the possibility of a run for the Republican
Party's presidential nomination in 2008.
NEW YORK (MarketWatch) -- When I first introduced the concept of
"medical diplomacy" as Secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services, it was my hope that the United States would better
integrate health policy into foreign policy, so that America might
better present itself to the world and improve the health and well
being of people around the world.
At no time is that need more apparent than now, when Thailand and
pharmaceutical companies (among other industries) are at odds over
patent protection for life-saving drugs.
One of the most complex issues is achieving the right balance between
providing poor and developing countries with access to life saving
medication while continuing to incent the private sector to invest in
innovation. Without investment in innovation, we run the risk of not
developing the very drugs needed to save lives around the world.
Achieving a balance is critically important to addressing complex
global health issues and to long-term sustainability, and diplomacy
plays key role. Without a doubt, the developing world, the U.S.
government and pharmaceutical companies are going to have to be more
willing to enter into dialogue to arrive at flexible approaches.
Diplomacy, as we all know, is a two way street. It involves talking,
cooperation, and working out differences. With these considerations
in mind, the situation unfolding in Thailand is especially concerning.
The government of Thailand has issued compulsory licenses -- the
forced licensing to generic manufacturers of medicines protected
under patent -- for three medications with plans for a potential 11
more drugs in various disease categories.
Companies have reacted variably, with one company announcing that it
has withdrawn new drug applications in Thailand for seven drugs and
will not bring any future medicines to the country since its patent
protection is under fire.
Unfortunately there was no diplomacy in this process: there was
virtually no effort to reach out to the U.S. government or the
companies that developed the drugs to arrive at a solution before the
licenses were issued. Thailand's aggressive first step has now
created an escalating battle between government and industry.
The immediate issue is not whether Thailand was legally entitled to
take the action under World Trade Organization rules, but rather
whether it was the right decision to solve a global problem.
As long as there is no framework for balancing questions of access on
the one hand and the need for drug development on the other, then the
Thailand example is potentially bound to repeat itself.
As the former Chairman of the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis
and Malaria, I know how important the mission is to provide access to
medications -- it is critical. But, supporting global public health
calls for collaboration between all stakeholders.
Collaboration has worked in the past. For instance, when foreign
governments have aggressively negotiated with US companies there have
been compromises reached that have produced win-win situations for
countries that are struggling to take care of their people.
In this increasingly complex environment governments also have a duty
to talk and exercise diplomacy to address not only this symptom, but
to put into place a framework that considers the larger global public
health need -- the balancing act between innovation and access. Until
such diplomacy begins to attack the bigger issues, both the Thai
government and pharmaceutical companies should sit down and work this
out -- and arrive at a mutual win that protects the motivation for
companies to continue researching new medicines while ensuring no one
goes without the life-saving therapies they need.