

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
Adding to the chorus of voices sounding alarm on the impacts of the pending TransPacific Partnership (TPP) trade deal, the head of the World Health Organization (WHO) said Thursday that there were "some very serious concerns" regarding the 12-nation pact.
Speaking to a conference in Geneva, Margaret Chan mentioned concern "about interference by powerful economic operators," and said, "I have been hearing some serious concerns that the TransPacific Partnership, the biggest trade agreement ever, may adversely affect the market for generics and biosimilars and increase the cost of medicines."
Repeating a comment she made in 2014, Chan asked, "If these agreements open trade yet close the door to affordable medicines we have to ask the question: is this really progress at all?"
"High prices block access," she added.
Tim Fernholz reported for Quartz Monday that the U.S., through the TPP, was exporting Big Pharma-friendly policies that keep drug prices high:
"Though the US in the end relented on some of its demands to protect its drug makers from competition--to the point where some US trade boosters threatened to pull their backing for the deal--the TPP still obliges signatory countries to accept many of the patent rules that help drug firms keep prices high in the US." [. . . ]
While the final agreement was significantly less restrictive than some advocates feared, trade lawyers who reviewed the intellectual property chapter (pdf) say it protects pharmaceutical patents more than previous trade deals do--in particular the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS), a global floor on patent rules that has loopholes to ensure cheap access to medicines.
As economist Dean Baker wrote this year ahead of the release of the official text, "the leaked intellectual property chapter indicates several extension of patent and related monopoly protections that would be expected to raise prices. Of course it is not 'certain' that the effect will be to raise drug prices, just as it is not certain that shooting someone at close range will lead to their death."
"Patent monopolies," he wrote in a separate post, "provide both enormous incentive and opportunity for drug companies to increase profits at the expense of patients."
Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz spoke about the issue on Thursday as well, telling Democracy Now!, "TPP, I think, is a very big mistake." He echoed Chan's concern that failure to lower generic drug prices will mean "many millions of people will be left behind."
You know, ordinary people need to be able to get medicines at a low price. We struck a balance in the United States in the Hatch-Waxman Act, where we said, "OK, Big Pharma has to be able to get some returns for their investments and research." But--mostly research really goes on in the universities, let's be clear, and at NIH government-sponsored research labs. But the generic medicines, which are now more than 80 percent of all drugs, bring the prices down. That's the competition that makes the market work. Well, we struck that balance, but in this trade agreement they're trying to restrike the balance in favor of Big Pharma. You know, this is--we were talking about President Obama's legacy. One of his big legacy is Obamacare, and that's supposed to bring access to medicine. But when you--TPP will go in exactly the wrong way, because it will restrict access to medicine for many countries around the world.
Other medical groups have joined the WHO in expressing concern over the deal, with professor Heather Yeatman, president of the Public Health Association of Australia, saying, "The TPP will be a blow for global health if it places life-saving medicines out of reach in developing countries."
And Judit Rius Sanjuan, U.S. manager and legal policy adviser of the Medecins Sans Frontieres Access Campaign said last month: "The big losers in the TPP are patients and treatment providers in developing countries. Although the text has improved over the initial demands, the TPP will still go down in history as the worst trade agreement for access to medicines in developing countries, which will be forced to change their laws to incorporate abusive intellectual property protections for pharmaceutical companies."
World governments finally made public the full text of the TPP last week, and it was immediately denounced by advocacy groups as "a disaster" and "worse than anything we could've imagined."
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Adding to the chorus of voices sounding alarm on the impacts of the pending TransPacific Partnership (TPP) trade deal, the head of the World Health Organization (WHO) said Thursday that there were "some very serious concerns" regarding the 12-nation pact.
Speaking to a conference in Geneva, Margaret Chan mentioned concern "about interference by powerful economic operators," and said, "I have been hearing some serious concerns that the TransPacific Partnership, the biggest trade agreement ever, may adversely affect the market for generics and biosimilars and increase the cost of medicines."
Repeating a comment she made in 2014, Chan asked, "If these agreements open trade yet close the door to affordable medicines we have to ask the question: is this really progress at all?"
"High prices block access," she added.
Tim Fernholz reported for Quartz Monday that the U.S., through the TPP, was exporting Big Pharma-friendly policies that keep drug prices high:
"Though the US in the end relented on some of its demands to protect its drug makers from competition--to the point where some US trade boosters threatened to pull their backing for the deal--the TPP still obliges signatory countries to accept many of the patent rules that help drug firms keep prices high in the US." [. . . ]
While the final agreement was significantly less restrictive than some advocates feared, trade lawyers who reviewed the intellectual property chapter (pdf) say it protects pharmaceutical patents more than previous trade deals do--in particular the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS), a global floor on patent rules that has loopholes to ensure cheap access to medicines.
As economist Dean Baker wrote this year ahead of the release of the official text, "the leaked intellectual property chapter indicates several extension of patent and related monopoly protections that would be expected to raise prices. Of course it is not 'certain' that the effect will be to raise drug prices, just as it is not certain that shooting someone at close range will lead to their death."
"Patent monopolies," he wrote in a separate post, "provide both enormous incentive and opportunity for drug companies to increase profits at the expense of patients."
Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz spoke about the issue on Thursday as well, telling Democracy Now!, "TPP, I think, is a very big mistake." He echoed Chan's concern that failure to lower generic drug prices will mean "many millions of people will be left behind."
You know, ordinary people need to be able to get medicines at a low price. We struck a balance in the United States in the Hatch-Waxman Act, where we said, "OK, Big Pharma has to be able to get some returns for their investments and research." But--mostly research really goes on in the universities, let's be clear, and at NIH government-sponsored research labs. But the generic medicines, which are now more than 80 percent of all drugs, bring the prices down. That's the competition that makes the market work. Well, we struck that balance, but in this trade agreement they're trying to restrike the balance in favor of Big Pharma. You know, this is--we were talking about President Obama's legacy. One of his big legacy is Obamacare, and that's supposed to bring access to medicine. But when you--TPP will go in exactly the wrong way, because it will restrict access to medicine for many countries around the world.
Other medical groups have joined the WHO in expressing concern over the deal, with professor Heather Yeatman, president of the Public Health Association of Australia, saying, "The TPP will be a blow for global health if it places life-saving medicines out of reach in developing countries."
And Judit Rius Sanjuan, U.S. manager and legal policy adviser of the Medecins Sans Frontieres Access Campaign said last month: "The big losers in the TPP are patients and treatment providers in developing countries. Although the text has improved over the initial demands, the TPP will still go down in history as the worst trade agreement for access to medicines in developing countries, which will be forced to change their laws to incorporate abusive intellectual property protections for pharmaceutical companies."
World governments finally made public the full text of the TPP last week, and it was immediately denounced by advocacy groups as "a disaster" and "worse than anything we could've imagined."
Adding to the chorus of voices sounding alarm on the impacts of the pending TransPacific Partnership (TPP) trade deal, the head of the World Health Organization (WHO) said Thursday that there were "some very serious concerns" regarding the 12-nation pact.
Speaking to a conference in Geneva, Margaret Chan mentioned concern "about interference by powerful economic operators," and said, "I have been hearing some serious concerns that the TransPacific Partnership, the biggest trade agreement ever, may adversely affect the market for generics and biosimilars and increase the cost of medicines."
Repeating a comment she made in 2014, Chan asked, "If these agreements open trade yet close the door to affordable medicines we have to ask the question: is this really progress at all?"
"High prices block access," she added.
Tim Fernholz reported for Quartz Monday that the U.S., through the TPP, was exporting Big Pharma-friendly policies that keep drug prices high:
"Though the US in the end relented on some of its demands to protect its drug makers from competition--to the point where some US trade boosters threatened to pull their backing for the deal--the TPP still obliges signatory countries to accept many of the patent rules that help drug firms keep prices high in the US." [. . . ]
While the final agreement was significantly less restrictive than some advocates feared, trade lawyers who reviewed the intellectual property chapter (pdf) say it protects pharmaceutical patents more than previous trade deals do--in particular the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS), a global floor on patent rules that has loopholes to ensure cheap access to medicines.
As economist Dean Baker wrote this year ahead of the release of the official text, "the leaked intellectual property chapter indicates several extension of patent and related monopoly protections that would be expected to raise prices. Of course it is not 'certain' that the effect will be to raise drug prices, just as it is not certain that shooting someone at close range will lead to their death."
"Patent monopolies," he wrote in a separate post, "provide both enormous incentive and opportunity for drug companies to increase profits at the expense of patients."
Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz spoke about the issue on Thursday as well, telling Democracy Now!, "TPP, I think, is a very big mistake." He echoed Chan's concern that failure to lower generic drug prices will mean "many millions of people will be left behind."
You know, ordinary people need to be able to get medicines at a low price. We struck a balance in the United States in the Hatch-Waxman Act, where we said, "OK, Big Pharma has to be able to get some returns for their investments and research." But--mostly research really goes on in the universities, let's be clear, and at NIH government-sponsored research labs. But the generic medicines, which are now more than 80 percent of all drugs, bring the prices down. That's the competition that makes the market work. Well, we struck that balance, but in this trade agreement they're trying to restrike the balance in favor of Big Pharma. You know, this is--we were talking about President Obama's legacy. One of his big legacy is Obamacare, and that's supposed to bring access to medicine. But when you--TPP will go in exactly the wrong way, because it will restrict access to medicine for many countries around the world.
Other medical groups have joined the WHO in expressing concern over the deal, with professor Heather Yeatman, president of the Public Health Association of Australia, saying, "The TPP will be a blow for global health if it places life-saving medicines out of reach in developing countries."
And Judit Rius Sanjuan, U.S. manager and legal policy adviser of the Medecins Sans Frontieres Access Campaign said last month: "The big losers in the TPP are patients and treatment providers in developing countries. Although the text has improved over the initial demands, the TPP will still go down in history as the worst trade agreement for access to medicines in developing countries, which will be forced to change their laws to incorporate abusive intellectual property protections for pharmaceutical companies."
World governments finally made public the full text of the TPP last week, and it was immediately denounced by advocacy groups as "a disaster" and "worse than anything we could've imagined."