[Pharm-policy] High cost of pharmaceuticals: controversial issue in DR and US

[Thiru Balasubramaniam]

This information was posted on May 3, 2000 on the Dominican Republic
One-Daily News website.


Thiru
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.dr1.com/daily/news030500.shtml


                          

High cost of pharmaceuticals: controversial issue in DR and US 

The Asociación de Industrias Farmaceuticas Dominicanas, Inc. says that
behind the movement to get the President to veto the recently passed
Intellectual Property Bill is that the pharmaceutical multinationals
oppose competition from national manufacturers in their attempt to
preserve their high profits. All the fuss is merely business lobbying by
pharmaceutical companies attempting to keep control of market where
local companies have increased their market share to 51%, say the local
manufacturers in an advertisement in the press today. Their position is
that the pharmaceuticals want to keep their privileges in an irregular
manner.  

The Association publishes today a list of comparative prices showing the
excessive pricing of the pharmaceutical multinational products in the
DR. Following is a listing of the drug and the cost of the
multinational brand and its local equivalent. Prices are in RD pesos. To
get the dollar equivalency, divide by 16. 
                         Enalapril - $581/$149
                         Simvastatina-$677/$312
                         Amlodipina-$704/$1674
                         Piroxicam-$1,560-$357
                         Fluoxetina-$659.75-$183.55
                         Nistatina-$225/$76
                         Omeprazol-$767-$325
                         Ranitidina-$280-$104
                         Piracetam-$360/$234
                         Lovastatina-$859-$286
          
The excessive profit of US pharmaceuticals is a controversial matter in
the US, too. Brian Schweitzer who is running for the Montana Democratic
nomination to challenge Sen. Conrad Burns (R-Mont.), maintains a crusade
against the high cost of prescription drugs in the United States versus
pricing of the same drugs in Canada and Mexico. 
(http://www.brianschweitzer.com/crusade.html)

Expert says new bill is compliant with WTO rules 

While the American and European chambers of commerce wave the threat
that the US government could remove trade privileges (such as CBI and
GSP), economist Jaime Aristy writes in the Listin Diario newspaper that
this would not stand in today's trade world that is ruled by the World
Trade Organization. To contest the content of the Intellectual Property
Bill passed by the Congress, a claim would have to be placed before the
WTO organization created for this purpose, the Dispute-Settlement Body
(DSB), says the reputed economist and intellectual property expert. 
                         

Aristy says that the new bill fills WTO stipulations. He said that the
Dominican legislators included elements that ensure the transfer of
technology and promotion of internal competition that is necessary to
raise the welfare of the Dominican people.  Aristy was critical that a
group of Dominican businessmen were letting themselves be used to spread
the news of a possible threat of removing preferential trade privileges
seeking to convince President Fernández to not sign the bill into law.  
(See http://www.dr1.com/daily/news050200.shtml) Aristy comments that the
president of the influential National Council of Business, Celso
Marranzini who initially supported the bill as passed by Congress,
abruptly did an about-face in his position. He quotes Marranzini saying
early on: "It is understandable that the US is interested in bills that
are made as they want, but this is not a matter of making a  custom-made
suit, bills should be made in accordance to the reality of each
country." Marranzini emphasized that countries need to legislate on
bills that are convenient to the interests of the majority.  Aristy said
that the bill was made consulting with international trade experts, such
as Carlos Correa and Luis Abugattas. 


Government position on Intellectual Property Bill 

Minister of Industry and Commerce Luis Manuel Bonetti explained that the
bill was prepared with the assistance of consultants from the World
Intellectual Property Organization. "Nobody can be penalized, that's
what the arbitrage department of the WTO is for," he says. He explained
that Uruguay was excluded from the 301 listing of the US government
because it has an intellectual property bill. He said that the 301
listing is illegal in regards to international order because no country
has the right to self-designate itself as the certifier of trade
policies of all countries.

Dominican representative before the WTO, Federico Cuello explains, "Five
years after the establishment of the WTO, it is unfortunate to observe
how small and open countries such as ours are pressed to renounce rights
acquired when ratifying the Uruguay Round agreements." He said that the
Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) is
inspired on principles of equity and equilibrium. He said the DR is
being forced to resign its rights to favor the most profitable and
compact industry in the world, the pharmaceutical industry.

And its consequences would be dramatic for the 8.5 million Dominican
consumers, whose precarious income is barely enough to pay for the basic
need basket, says the Minister.  "It is necessary to create an
awareness, especially in the minds of our business leaders, about the
favorable margin that there exists to safeguard national interests in
the application of TRIPS," highlights Ambassador Cuello, the nation's
WTO expert. 

"Trips is not a model law, but an agreement that specifies minimum
protection standards. Each country is free to apply those standards
regarding its internal systems," explains Cuello who says that that is
what the country has done with the new intellectual property bill.