[Ip-health] Bloomberg: Drug firms against trade changes

[Mike Palmedo]

http://www.bilaterals.org/article.php3?id_article=3D8181

Drug firms against trade changes

US drugmakers, among the biggest proponents of free-trade agreements,
are now lobbying to stop Democrats and the Bush administration from
reworking pending trade deals to curb provisions that benefit the industry.

The Morning Call
May 7, 2007

They are lobbying to stop moves that would curb benefits to the industry.

By Mark Drajem of Bloomberg News

U.S. drugmakers, among the biggest proponents of free-trade agreements,
are now lobbying to stop Democrats and the Bush administration from
reworking pending trade deals to curb provisions that benefit the industry.

In the works are proposals pushed by Democrats to revise trade
agreements with Panama and Peru that would make it harder for U.S.
drugmakers to keep testing information on their drugs secret from
generic manufacturers, according to business lobbyists and activists
briefed on the details.

The negotiators also want to remove requirements that drug patents be
extended if the companies face long delays in getting approval to sell
their products in those countries, they said.

The proposals, if adopted as part of a larger package of changes, would
mean House Ways and Means Chairman Charles Rangel and the White House
would cut provisions the United States insisted upon when those trade
agreements were being negotiated.

=92=92This is something we=92re giving up unilaterally, without asking
anything in return,=92=92 said Grant Aldonas, a former Bush administration
trade official and fellow at the nonpartisan Center for Strategic and
International Studies in Washington. =92=92But it=92s become the quid pro q=
uo
to get the deal.=92=92

Health activists back the changes, saying they will mean cheaper
life-saving medicines for AIDS victims and others in poor nations,
according to Rohit Malpani of Oxfam America.

The Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, a
Washington-based trade group that lobbies on behalf of companies such as
Pfizer Inc. and Merck & Co., counters that protecting patent rights
abroad is crucial to their ability to develop new, life-saving drugs and
to feel confident they will be able to export those drugs.

=92=92The proposals are evolving and there are ongoing discussions,=92=92 s=
aid
Mark Grayson, spokesman for the industry group. =92=92Mr. Rangel=92s
objectives and our objectives are similar: We want to get medicines to
people who need them.=92=92

Also, prospects for an overall pact between the White House and Rangel
on pending free-trade agreements with Panama and Peru dimmed this week,
after both sides said they were ready to sign off on a deal a week ago.

Republicans =92=92have serious reservations about what they agreed to,=92=
=92
Rangel said Thursday, according to The Hill newspaper. On Friday, Rangel
and Jim McCrery, the top Republican on the panel, released a joint
statement saying they would =92=92continue working into the foreseeable
future to resolve any remaining differences.=92=92

Health advocacy groups say the rules in previously negotiated trade
deals increase the price of drugs for people in other nations.

Since the United States implemented a trade agreement with Jordan in
2001, prices for medicines there have increased by 20 percent,
threatening the sustainability of the government-run health program,
according to a study this year by Oxfam.

In Guatemala, thousands of protesters stormed the streets of Guatemala
City in 2005 to resist U.S.-mandated changes to their drug patent laws
as part of the Central American Free Trade Agreement. Sixty drugs not
under patent in that country now have their efficacy data under seal,
according to Luis Velasquez, senior director of the Association of
Guatemalan Pharmaceutical Industries.

Generic drugmakers use the data of innovative drug companies to prove to
local health regulatory bodies that their product is safe and effective.
Without access to that data, they can=92t prove that their copies work.

Velasquez plans a trip to Washington next month to try to persuade
lawmakers to rework the protections in Guatemala=92s already completed
agreement.

The pharmaceutical companies, in filings to the U.S. Trade
Representative=92s office, argue that much of the $800 million they spend
developing each new drug goes into that testing. They also say current
trade accords with smaller, lower-income economies, which include drug
protection provisions, should set a baseline for future U.S. trade deals
with other nations.

=92=92If you get enough of your ducks lined up in these individual deals,
you will get less resistance at the multilateral level=92=92 such as the
World Trade Organization, said Susan Sell, a professor at George
Washington University and author of =92=92Private Power, Public Law: The
Globalization of Intellectual Property Rights.=92=92

In March, Rangel announced a plan that he said was aimed at finding a
balance between promoting access to medicine and protecting development
of new drugs.

In each of the pending agreements, pharmaceutical companies can keep the
testing data used to show the safety and efficacy of their product
secret for five years from the time a company applies for a patent in
that country. Under Rangel=92s provision, patent protection would start
five years from when the company first applies for a patent in the
United States, said people familiar with it. Companies often patent
medicines first in the United States, and only later move to do so in
developing nations.

That step is part of a broader change, pushed by lawmakers such as
Democrat Tom Allen of Maine, to align trade policies with public health
concerns.

--
Mike Palmedo
Research Coordinator
Program on Information Justice and Intellectual Property
American University, Washington College of Law
4910 Massachutsetts Ave., NW Washington, DC 20016
T - 202-274-4442 | F 202-274-0659
mpalmedo@wcl.american.edu