Healthy IPRs
report’s findings, which are summarised below, have been the subject of significant – and justified – criticism.
The WHO Commission’s Report on IPRs, Innovation and Public Health
Section 3 analyses the way drugs are developed, pointing out that it is likely to cost less than the industry average to develop products to treat diseases that mainly affect developing
The report’s findings
countries.
Section 1 of the report notes the relative lack of research into
latory procedures in developing countries, which could then
Type III diseases, such as African river blindness, which occur
evaluate products using their own risk-benefit standards, which
almost entirely in developing countries whose governments
might differ from those in the developed world. It cites a US
and patients lack purchasing power. Patents and similar market
decision to withdraw a rotavirus vaccine because of a 1 in
incentives do not stimulate research and development (R&D)
10,000 risk of an obstruction in the bowel – odds which devel-
into new drugs to treat such diseases, since developing countries
oping countries, where 600,000 children die every year from
generally have neither the scientific infrastructure nor a private
severe rotavirus diarrhoea, might be willing to tolerate.2
sector capable of innovation. And the huge cost of developing
The report finds no evidence that implementing the TRIPS
new drugs makes it difficult to market them at affordable prices
requirement for all WTO members to introduce patent regimes
for developing countries.
would significantly boost R&D for Type III diseases, as the real
Section 2 analyses the process of discovering new drugs. The
problem is insufficient market incentives. It suggests that an
report suggests the WHO should establish a permanent forum
open source approach, similar to the software industry, might
of governments, companies, academics and patients to enable
be useful for tackling biomedical research problems in devel-
organised sharing of information and greater coordination.
oping countries.
More controversially, it proposes that the WHO should act to
Section 4 examines the problems of delivering medicines to
make companies’ libraries more accessible, with a view to iden-
patients in developing countries, notably inadequate health
tifying compounds for use against diseases that affect devel-
infrastructures and emigration of healthcare workers. It suggests
oping countries. (Of course, as the report itself notes, these
making greater use of traditional medicine practitioners in
libraries are a key factor in competition between companies,
developing countries.
which may be reluctant to accept this suggestion.) It suggests
The report gives the startling estimate that up to 25% of
that the WHO and World Intellectual Property Organization
medicines taken in the developing world are counterfeit or
(WIPO) encourage patent pools and promote research, notably
substandard,3 and proposes tackling this problem through
through research exemptions in patent legislation and compul-
good manufacturing practices and supply chain management.
sory licences under the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of
It calls on the pharmaceutical industry to maintain transparent
Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS Agreement).
and consistent pricing policies, arguing that prices of patented
80
80-81
The report calls for work to improve clinical trials and regu-
81
20/3/07 15:35:08