Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Novartis Prefers to Profit off Pandemic?
While the Obama administration's getting serious about healthcare reform, it's time for a rather pointed reading comprehension test.
Consider the following story and find, if you can, the obvious problem:
The Swiss drug company Novartis will not give free vaccines against H1N1 flu to poor countries -- it will only consider discounts.
Novartis's refusal comes in the wake of a request from the Director General of the World Health Organization, Dr. Margaret Chan, who has called for drug companies to show solidarity with poor countries as they develop vaccines against the H1NI or "swine flu" pandemic.
Just by way of reminder, H1N1 has infected around 30,000 people globally, mostly in North America, though there have been a few deaths outside Mexico and the United States. Europe suffered its first death on Sunday. The first has just been reported in Argentina.
Help the poor prevent a pandemic? Novartis said 'No'. That's Novartis --makers of Exedrin and Bufferin -- I guess they haven't made enough off those over-the-counter best-sellers.
"If you want to make production sustainable, you have to create financial incentives," explained Novartis Chief Executive Daniel Vasella.
By "financial incentives" he means the 'p' word: profits.
Spot the flaw in the profit-driven approach to health care? Anyone?
Financial incentives?
When a pandemic isn't incentive enough -- I'd say we have another 'p' word -- a problem.
- Posted in
11 Comments so far
Show AllWhy anyone ever allowed profits to drive the wellness of human beings is beyond me.
There was recently a strange story about Baxter International. They accidently included live bird flu in a flu vaccination that was administered to some people before the error was caught. Baxter said they didn't need to explain the error because is was proprietary information. It could have been gross incompetence. It could have been an effort to make a big P. We'll never know.
The point of a vaccination program is not to stop the individual from getting the disease (nice as that is) but to stop enough individuals from getting it so that it can't spread (there is a critical number to do accomplish that, depending on factors such as how communicable the pathogen is). If a large segment of people are not vaccinated, not only does the disease spread, but it also mutates so that it becomes resistant and the vaccination is no longer effective. It is like how germs develop resistance when a regimen of antibiotics isn't completed.
(This is one reason people need to understand how evoution works.)
Around 30,000 people worldwide, mostly in North America, have come down with "swine flu". Around 150 have died worldwide. Last year the "normal flu" killed around 35,000 people in the U.S. alone, a typical year. So what is the big deal FEAR CAMPAIGN being conducted for? "Swine flu" shouldn't even be a blip on the radar. What is happening? At first I was going to say that Novartis profits are a non-issue in light of the above data. But maybe that is the whole point. Who benefits? Who, exactly, is promoting "swine flu" as a huge, dangerous "pandemic"? Will you allow yourself to be injected with some substance, called a vaccine, of which you know nothing of its contents except what the government tells you is in it? Has the government ever conducted medical/chemical experiments on an unaware public?
SWINE FLU SHOULD BE A NON-ISSUE.
Exactly! In its current form it isn't any more dangerous than any other, and if it mutates into something more deadly, the vaccination for it can't be produced prior to the mutation, can it?
Has the (our?) government ever conducted medical/chemical experiments on an unaware public? I pretty sure your question is rhetorical. The episode of radiation experiments on unaware citizens reads like science fiction but is true.
No, I do not want to be injected with anything these criminal idiots are pushing.
Oh, my point, I almost forgot! That emergency spending bill included $8B for just this.
And it was taken out by the GOP.
It's very confusing. Apparently the GOP took out the flu funding in the stimulus. Obama asked for $1.5B in the emergency, which was passed, I think.
From Propublica:
The funding debate goes back to November 2005, when President George W. Bush released the “National Strategy for Pandemic Influenza,” requesting $7.1 billion to stockpile antiviral drugs, raise awareness and develop vaccines.
Since then, Congress has approved $6.1 billion. There were two final pieces to be funded in the 2008 and 2009 budgets. But in 2008, funding stalled. Congress requested $650 million, but the bill was vetoed by President Bush and Congress failed to override. In 2009, Congress requested $500 million, but with the lame-duck session, the vote got pushed back until after the stimulus package.
The upshot: The nugget of criticisms this week was true—flu funding was cut in final negotiations of the stimulus plan. But important details got lost in the mix.
While more than 90 percent of President Bush’s request has been funded, Hamburg and others say the government is still unprepared.
“The goal is to be able to manufacture capacity to produce enough vaccine for the American population within six months of identifying the strain,” Hamburg said. “They have resources to deal with it at the current level of the swine flu. But long term, should this be a national pandemic, they’re not completely where they want to be.”
To that end, President Obama requested $1.5 billion in emergency funding to stockpile antiviral drugs, develop a vaccine and assist other countries to stem the swine flu outbreak.
http://www.propublica.org/ion/stimulus/item/stimulus-and-swine-flu-fact-check-part-2-429
From what I've seen, some amount was passed under Bush a couple years ago, several billion I think. Then the GOP stripped it out of the stimulus bill, and Obama got some more funding from the emergency bill just for flu preparedness. And a couple stupid conservative editorials parroted the fact "Bush helped prepare us" without noting that their Senate champions took more money for it out of the stimulus. Oy.
I don't think there is a big fear campaign but merely misunderstanding, due to poor education in biology and evolution.
Firstly, this H1N1 virus is completely novel and no-one has immunity (i.e. antibodies against the virus) since it has never before existed. Fortunately most early cases seem to be relatively mild and the death rate has not been very high. It is important to develop a vaccine so that the population may develop immunity (antibodies) by vaccination rather than being infected by the live virus. This is particularly important because influenza mutates rapidly (partly because its not very good at copying its genetic material) and could develop into a more lethal strain. If it develops into a more lethal sister strain then it is quite probable that the vaccine would also confer some (or complete) immunity to the more lethal sister strain.
Not all companies take the Novartis position as Reuters reported "Vaccine maker Sanofi Aventis said on Wednesday it will donate 100 million doses of vaccine against the new H1N1 swine flu to the World Health Organization once it gets them made."
30,000 people died in the US in car accidents in 2008...but you already knew that...just supportin' ekaton's point...
which causes of death warrant concern, and which don't, and why?
what we're really arguing as we discuss future policy, especially the environment\economy thing, is acceptable causes of death, and acceptable qualities and durations of life...what might those be? Anything short of Everyone Lives Forever? Is living happy as important, or more important, than living long?
Is it okay to die in a car wreck, but not of cancer?
No, it's OKAY to die from cancer, or the flu, or adverse effects of prescription drugs.... so long as you have already spent your family's life savings on medical advise and procedures, many of which are known to be ineffective. What we have here is a case where a SWISS drug company with a treatment is BAD, but soon you will hear about an AMERICAN company, mayby one affiliated with Donald Rumsfeld with a treatment that overcharges everybody and his brother with money, but is willing to experiment for free on uneducated third world indiginous people. Just a guess.