[Ip-health] KEI Statement on Trump Administration Efforts to Raise Drug Prices Internationally

Michael H Davis m.davis at csuohio.edu
Fri May 11 11:00:07 PDT 2018

I don't think the argument is helped by the use of the word "rights"in this context. It automatically legitimate the strategy. How about "privileges" or better yet "protections". And maybe drop the term intellectual property.



Prof. Mickey Davis
917/771-0235 (cell)

Mailing Address:
Cleveland State University
2121 Euclid Avenue, LB 234
Cleveland, OH 44115-2214

Campus Location:
Cleveland-Marshall College of Law
1801 Euclid Avenue
Law Building, LB 234

Admitted to practice before the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Reg. No. 45,863

-------- Original message --------
From: Claire Cassedy <claire.cassedy at keionline.org>
Date: 5/11/18 1:57 PM (GMT-05:00)
To: ip-health at lists.keionline.org
Subject: [Ip-health] KEI Statement on Trump Administration Efforts to Raise Drug Prices Internationally

*11 May 2016*
*For Immediate Release*

James Love
Email: james.love at keionline.org
Tel.: (202)332-2670
Cell: (202)361-3040

*Statement also available via: https://www.keionline.org/27768

*Knowledge Ecology International statement on Trump Administration efforts
to force price increases for drugs sold in foreign countriesThe following
statement can be attributed to James Love, Director, on May 11, 2018.“The
Trump Administration is proposing that the U.S. government advocate higher
drug prices in foreign countries. We’ll have to see the details of how this
effort will be managed, but the overall policy proposal is not new. Since
the Reagan administration, every U.S. president has worked closely with big
drug companies to advocate for broader, stronger and more durable
intellectual property rights for new medicines, regulatory barriers to
competition, and to weaken national efforts to lower drug prices through
restrictions on reimbursements, price controls or other measures. For
example, Presidents Obama, Bush and Clinton all sought similar outcomes,
efforts that are easily documented by merely reading two reports published
annually by the White House Office of the United States Trade
Representative (USTR). These include: 1. National Trade Estimate Report on
Foreign Trade Barriers (see below for examples), and2. Special 301 Report
(see: https://www.keionline.org/ustr/special301
<https://www.keionline.org/ustr/special301> for all 30 years of these
reports).There is much that can be said about this issue, but the following
are the most critical points. 1. Raising foreign drug prices, as was the
result of early NAFTA negotiations in Canada or the WTO negotiations that
lead to the TRIPS agreement, does not lower US prices. In fact, the higher
foreign prices are, and the harder it is to obtain low cost generics
outside the United States, the easier it will be to charge higher prices in
the United States.2. Raising drug prices here or in foreign markets does in
fact enhance global incentives to invest in R&D for new products. That
said, it is not an efficient way to do so, since companies at best only
reinvest a small portion of revenues in R&D. 3. Governments around the
world do not want higher drug prices, they want lower prices, so
influencing foreign drug prices is hard, particularly when the higher
prices lead to larger budget deficits and/or less access, and contribute to
otherwise preventable death and suffering of the countries’ own citizens.4.
The consequence of high drug prices is predictable access barriers, greater
disparities of access (based upon incomes), and abandonment of all pretense
that “access to medicine for all” is actually a goal. 5. A less expensive
and more effective way to promote innovation and to address freeriding is
to focus on the low levels of public sector funding for biomedical research
in many countries. Switzerland, for example, is getting rich off its policy
of letting the NIH finance much of the R&D it licenses from universities
and other NIH grant recipients, while providing very little government
funding for biomedical R&D itself. 6. The U.S. government should support
rather than oppose new global norms that would require our trading partners
to match the R&D subsidies that the NIH and other federal agencies provide,
as well as the U.S. government-funded Orphan Drug Tax Credit. This is a way
to address cross-border contributions to R&D without killing people.We have
watched several shifts in policies over the years in regards to foreign
drug prices. The most constant has been the steady collaboration between
the U.S. Congress and the Executive Branch to impose policies on foreign
countries designed to raise drug prices, something that takes place year in
and year out. There have been a few notable exceptions to the pro-pharma
and anti-patient drift of policy, including decisions from 1999 to 2000 by
President Clinton on HIV drug patents in sub-Saharan Africa (following
considerable outside pressure from HIV activists), the 2001 Doha
Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and Public Health, and the 2007 new
trade policy adopted by President Bush which relaxed trade pressures on
some issues. The Obama Administration worked very closely with big pharma
in ways too numerous to mention here, including involvement by Vice
President Joe Biden among others, and the Trump Administration has taken a
hard pro-pharma line on issues, almost immediately.  The whole state of
affairs is appalling, given what is known about the human suffering
associated with high and abusive drug prices, and the U.S. government’s
continued opposition to work on an R&D agreement in the World Health
Organization or other fora, and its opposition to work on the delinkage of
R&D incentives from drug prices, measures that would, if embraced, provide
for a more promising future where innovation, access, affordability and
fairness would all be feasible.”Contact:James LoveDirectorEmail:
james.love at keionline.org <james.love at keionline.org>Tel.:
(202)332-2670Website: www.keionline.org<http://www.keionline.org> <http://www.keionline.org>Links to
USTR Special 301 ReportsSee: https://www.keionline.org/ustr/special301
<https://www.keionline.org/ustr/special301>Links to NTE reportsSeveral
available via: https://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/002061620
Ip-health mailing list
Ip-health at lists.keionline.org

More information about the Ip-health mailing list