Go Back   I-Mockery Forum > I-Mockery Discussion Forums > Philosophy, Politics, and News
FAQ Members List Calendar Today's Posts

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Buffalo Tom Buffalo Tom is offline
Member
Buffalo Tom's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Map Ref 41N 93W
Buffalo Tom is probably a spambot
Old Oct 21st, 2003, 10:46 AM        Yay Canada!
From this week's issue of 'The Nation'...

Bush's AIDS Test

by Naomi Klein

Fighting AIDS was supposed to show George W. Bush's softer side. "Seldom has history offered a greater opportunity to do so much for so many," he said in his State of the Union address this past January. He has since reconsidered, deciding instead to offer a few more opportunities to the few. First he handed the top job of his Global AIDS Initiative to a Big Pharma boss, then he broke his $3 billion promise of AIDS relief and now there are concerns that he may sabotage a plan to send cheap drugs to countries ravaged by AIDS.

This past August, the World Trade Organization announced a new deal on drug patents that was supposed to give poor countries facing health problems the right to import generic drugs. But the deal seemed unworkable: The United States, at the behest of the pharmaceutical lobby, had successfully pushed for so many conditions that the agreement exploded from a straightforward forty-nine words to a sprawling 3,200-word maze.

Countries wanting to import cheap generics must jump through multiple hoops to prove they are truly in need, unable to afford patented drugs and incapable of producing the medicines domestically. Meanwhile, there is no guarantee that there will be a sufficient supply of drugs for them to buy, since the deal also puts up hurdles for countries wanting to export. "A 'gift' tightly bound in red tape," declared a coalition of NGOs, including Médecins Sans Frontières and Third World Network.

Perhaps that's why US Trade Representative Robert Zoellick praised the agreement. So did Harvey Bale, the premier spokesman for Big Pharma and director-general of the International Federation of Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Associations. Bale, who had lobbied against the deal, told Reuters that the latest neutering resulted in "a fairly balanced text" that "adds clarity."

But now something unexpected is happening. The Canadian government, under intense pressure from AIDS activists and the United Nations, is trying to put the WTO agreement into practice. In September, the government announced plans to amend its patent law to allow the manufacture of generic versions of patented drugs exclusively for export to poor countries.

African AIDS groups have hailed the plan as a breakthrough, especially if it spurs more countries to suspend patent protections to export generic drugs to countries in need. And the need is huge. Of the roughly 30 million Africans with HIV, 4.1 million need antiretroviral drugs, yet only 50,000-75,000 have access to them. The World Health Organization has pledged to get 3 million people into treatment by 2005. That would require a minimum of 6 million pills a day, a demand that cannot be met by the current generic drug suppliers alone.

All of a sudden, Harvey Bale is not pleased. The agreement he praised when it was just a feel-good press release is now, according to Bale's recent statements, a "dead end" and "window dressing," resulting in a "negative black eye for Canada."

Bale has pulled out all of Big Pharma's favorite myths: Africa doesn't need cheap drugs, it needs infrastructure (it needs both); brand name companies have already slashed their prices to compete with generics (discounted brand versions are still at least twice as expensive); weakening patents will hurt corporate profits and destroy the incentive for new research (Africa accounts for roughly 1 percent of the $400 billion pharmaceutical industry's total sales).

Now that the pharmaceutical lobby has let its opposition be known, all eyes are on Washington. Will the United States try to block the Canadian initiative or water it down--and if so, how?

Canadian officials say they fear that the Bush Administration's weapon will be the North American Free Trade Agreement. NAFTA permits governments to suspend drug patents if the drugs are "predominantly" for domestic purposes, but it makes no explicit allowances for exports to other countries.

For the past two years, US trade negotiators have haggled over the details of the WTO drug deal, eventually signing it. If the United States now uses NAFTA to kill or weaken the plan just when promises are turning into medicines, it would be a staggering display of bad faith, even by Bush standards.

Any government considering joining the Free Trade Area of the Americas should be hearing deafening alarm bells right now. The patent protections in the draft FTAA agreement are even tougher than those in NAFTA; if it is adopted, as the Bush Administration hopes, the United States could try to block affordable drug exports anywhere in the Americas. Put simply, the Administration is rigging bilateral and regional trade deals to undermine any attempt by poor countries to exercise their rights in the multilateral sphere.

Canada could well win a NAFTA challenge, but there is no indication that Ottawa is up for the fight. Paul Martin, the man set to become Canada's next Prime Minister, has stated that Canada's "number one challenge is keeping that American border open." If it looks like the AIDS drug initiative would place that goal in jeopardy, the Canadian government's newfound courage could quickly evaporate.

At a press conference on October 7, Zoellick left the door open for a NAFTA challenge, calling Canada's plan a "very fine step" but adding, "we, of course, would expect that Canada...would maintain the rules we agreed on." Bush's AIDS strategy is far less ambiguous. His $3-billion-a-year AIDS pledge has been whittled down to $2 billion, possibly much less. And on October 2, the Senate approved Bush's choice to head his Global AIDS Initiative: Randall Tobias, former CEO of drug giant Eli Lilly, charter member of the industry group leading the charge against the Canadian plan. Tobias's appointment is a bit like trusting the CEO of ExxonMobil to lead a government effort to promote solar power. The Bush Administration insists that Tobias, who is holding on to his Eli Lilly stock, will not use the job to do Big Pharma's bidding and will support the use of generics if they are cheaper.

The first test will be whether Randall Tobias joins his old friend Harvey Bale to declare war on an initiative that could save millions of lives.
__________________
You're cooler than me
Reply With Quote
  #2  
AChimp AChimp is offline
Resident Chimp
AChimp's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: The Jungles of Borneo
AChimp is probably a real personAChimp is probably a real person
Old Oct 21st, 2003, 02:23 PM       
Hmm... I am pretty sure that drug patent laws in Canada already prevent a whole whack load of bullshit that happens in the U.S. (like reversing the chemical formula and saying it's a new product), and I believe that existing patents only last for half as long.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
The One and Only... The One and Only... is offline
Mocker
The One and Only...'s Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Harlem
The One and Only... is probably a spambot
Old Oct 21st, 2003, 06:52 PM       
You want to know how the U.S. could water-down the initiative? BAM! We're going to kick it up a notch by seperating health care and state, eliminating the FDA, and unrestricting traveling by corporations abroad! Oh yeah!
__________________
I have seen all things that are done under the sun; all is vanity and a chase after wind.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Zebra 3 Zebra 3 is offline
Striped Tomato
Zebra 3's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Bay City
Zebra 3 is probably a spambot
Old Oct 24th, 2003, 03:22 PM       
I saw just a couple of weeks ago, Illinois' governor on CNN stating that he's planning to import Canadian prescription drugs for half the price. Link: www.Illinois.Gov
__________________
'Huuutch!' - Starsky
Reply With Quote
  #5  
mburbank mburbank is offline
The Moxie Nerve Food Tonic
mburbank's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: right behind you
mburbank has disabled reputation
Old Oct 24th, 2003, 03:27 PM       
Bill Clinton just brokered a deal to get AIDS drugs to third world countries for about 38 cents a day per patient. How do you suppose that forst W's pumpkins.

And One and Another... You do see a difference between being LP and being an anarchist, right?
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Cosmo Electrolux Cosmo Electrolux is offline
Stone Pants Rabbit
Cosmo Electrolux's Avatar
Join Date: May 2001
Location: In your distant memory
Cosmo Electrolux is probably a spambot
Old Oct 24th, 2003, 03:39 PM       
Canada still in the midst of a pumpkin drought?
Reply With Quote
  #7  
The One and Only... The One and Only... is offline
Mocker
The One and Only...'s Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Harlem
The One and Only... is probably a spambot
Old Oct 24th, 2003, 04:17 PM       
Quote:
Originally Posted by mburbank
And One and Another... You do see a difference between being LP and being an anarchist, right?
Ya. I'm not an anarchist: there are too many inconsistancies.

Despite what you may think, I don't have a problem with a lot of the New Deal i.e. health regulations, etc. What I do have a problem with is:

- Prevention or delay of liquidation.

- Continuing inflation.

- Keeping wage rates up.

- Keeping prices up.

- Stimulating consumption and discouraging savings.

- Subsidizing unemployment.

- Government monopoly in currency production.

- Central banks in general.

- So called "fractional-reserve" banking, which should be classified as fraud. The other option I suggest would be indicating through contract what fraction of money put into the bank could be immediately withdrawed.

- The elimination of the gold standard, although if a commodity could be found that varied less than gold, I would suggest using it as the standard.

Were I to accept a flat monetary system, the law would have to prevent the amount of money in circulation from changing drastically - as it is now, the government has the option to print a billion dollars for practically no cost.

You can thank Rothbard for enlightening me, as well as several other libertarian thinkers.

I also believe a lot of problems can be solved with strict property rights. Take, for example, the pollution of air by industry. Air must be classified as public property; therefore, polluting it should simply not be tolerated, just as how we cannot litter on the highway. In addition, we must get rid of sovereign immunity.
__________________
I have seen all things that are done under the sun; all is vanity and a chase after wind.
Reply With Quote
Reply



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

   


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:55 AM.


© 2008 I-Mockery.com
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.