La Novartis non vuole chi siano prodotti farmaci generici in India e intanto molte persone muoiono per la mancanza di questi farmaci!
Inoltre molte ONG stanno avendo problemi per fornire farmaci alle popolazioni. Mezzo miliardo di Indiani, che vino nelle peggiori situazioni di povertà, stanno rischiando la vita per colpa della Novartis che si è opposta alla produzione dei medicinali generici in India.
Inoltre ricordiamoci che i farmaci made in India sono una speranza in tutto il Sud del Mondo non solo in India, perché hanno prezzi più accessibili!
Così è in corso un'iniziativa di Medici Senza Frontiere.
"Prima la gente poi i brevetti
Firma anche tu per salvaguardare il diritto di milioni di persone a ricevere i farmaci salvavita"
Vai a questi siti internet
http://www.msf.org/petition_india/italy.html
PEOPLE BEFORE PATENTS:
THE LIVES OF MILLIONS ARE AT STAKE!!
SIGN-ON TO HELP PROTECT ACCESS TO AFFORDABLE MEDICINES!!
Pharmaceutical company Novartis is taking the Indian government to court. If the company wins, millions of people across the globe could have their sources of affordable medicines dry up.
http://www.msf.org/
Per sapere della situazione in India ed nel Sud del Mondo Thawani V, Gharpure K, Thawani M. Patent laws must be in the national interest. Indian J Pharmacol [serial online] 2006 [cited 2007 Feb 20];38:70-72. Available from:
http://www.ijp-online.com/article.asp?issn=0253-7613 year=2006 volume=38 issue=1 spage=70 epage=72 aulast=Thawani
Leggete anche cosa mia ha detto la Novartis il 5 Febbraio 2007 in risposta all'e-mail di potresta
Dear Sir or Madam,
You previously wrote to Dr Vasella regarding the Novartis legal action in India. As this case continues we felt that you might appreciate an answer to some of your further questions which have arisen, and to be kept up to date.
We want to reiterate, that our case in India is about gaining clarity and strengthening the Indian patent system, which will ultimately help patients and societies. Glivec® / Gleevec® is widely recognized as a life-saving breakthrough cancer medicine and has been awarded a patent in nearly 40 countries, including China. We think the same should be the case in India.
This is not an issue about access to medicine. In India, Novartis currently provides Glivec at no charge to 99% of the patients who are prescribed the medicine. Through the Glivec Patient Assistance Program (GIPAP), every person in India who is prescribed Glivec but cannot afford the medicine is given Glivec at no cost from Novartis. We firmly believe that patients in need of essential medicines such as Glivec should have access regardless of their economic resources.
Over the last few weeks, we have received additional questions and would like to provide you with further information.
1. Would this case block exports of Indian-produced generics to poor countries?
No, we believe our legal challenge in India will not hinder the supply of medicines to the poor. Flexibilities in international trade agreements now allow for export of medicines produced under voluntary or compulsory licenses that are issued for public health reasons. These provisions have been put in place to safeguard access to medicines for poor countries that do not have sufficient local production capacity. Novartis fully supports these provisions and our case does not impact them.
2. What role do generics play in access to medicines?
Some groups contend that generics alone can solve the access to medicines issue. In reality, sustainable access to medicines in developing countries is extremely complex and requires much more than the availability of generic drugs. High-quality generics play an important role, but the generics model cannot solve the problem alone. Consider these situations:
When generics are cheaper but still unaffordable
Even our critics recognize that generic versions of Glivec are not the solution for the poor in India. Generic Imatinib (Glivec) in India is four to five times the average annual income.
Markets where there are no incentives for a generic manufacturer
Generic companies also pursue markets that make business sense and only sell their products where it is possible to make a profit.
When start-up risk is too high for a generic manufacturer
Some products require significant and potentially risky upfront investment that generic manufacturers are not willing to take on. For example, following a request from the WHO, Novartis invested significant resources to increase then-current production of our anti-malarial drug Coartem by a factor of 100 – all without any guarantee that the drugs would be used.
And finally where the compounds generically available are not adequate to treat the disease, or where research and development efforts need to be made to make new treatments available
The issue of access to medicine is not one of patents, but of availability. It is important to note that as generic companies do not provide access programs, they do not contribute to making medicines available to poor patients who cannot pay for their medicines.
3. Why does Novartis treat only a few thousand patients with Glivec in India, a country of over one billion people?
Glivec is used to treat two extremely rare diseases. Of patients in India who are prescribed Glivec, fewer than 20% use the generic version; of those who use Glivec, 99% receive it free of charge through the Glivec International Patient Access Program (GIPAP). GIPAP covers every person in India who is prescribed Glivec and cannot afford this life-saving medicine.
There are conflicting statistics on the number of patients with these diseases who remain undiagnosed, and working to maximize diagnosis is one way GIPAP goes beyond providing medicines to those in need. The program works closely with 87 oncologists and hematologists throughout India, providing education on proper diagnosis and the program’s referral process. As doctor awareness and knowledge increases, the number of patients left undiagnosed decreases.
4. Does Novartis really care about helping the poor?
The commitment of Novartis to helping patients and improving access to medicine is underscored by our programs in 2006 that reached nearly 34 million disadvantaged patients with contributions valued at nearly one billion Swiss francs. These programs range from efforts to eradicate leprosy, to provide novel treatments for patients with tuberculosis or malaria and to help more than 22,000 people worldwide gain free access to Glivec.
5. How does innovation suffer if Novartis is not awarded a patent for Glivec?
Our case in India is solely about safeguarding intellectual property for Glivec, one of our most innovative medicines. A positive ruling in this case will strengthen India’s patent system, allowing patients there to benefit from innovative therapies otherwise not developed and made available.
On a broader scale, if only generic companies existed there would be no innovation in medicines. It is the research-based pharmaceuticals industry that makes significant investments to develop the next generation of life-saving medicines for diseases currently considered untreatable. Novartis believes that patents help to sustain and advance pharmaceutical research and development, resulting in innovation that saves lives. The innovation embodied in Glivec, for example, has brought patients dramatic therapeutic benefits previously thought impossible. In fact, recent data from a landmark study showed that about 90% of patients taking Glivec were alive after five years of treatment; without it, their survival prognosis was very grim.
Access to medicines in the developing world is a complex problem; there are many pieces to the puzzle. A range of underlying or related issues such as appropriate infrastructure and distribution networks must be addressed in parallel. This can only be achieved through the collaboration of all involved stakeholders working together to ensure that patients in need receive proper care. We seek an open dialogue with all groups, one based on mutual trust and tolerance with the aim of long-term success – not only in access-to-medicines initiatives but also in day-to-day business activities.
Finally, as an update on the court case, the original hearing scheduled for January 29 has been postponed until mid-February. The Counsel for the Union of India asked the court to adjourn the hearing to await instructions from government following a review of the recently submitted Mashelkar Committee report. The government-established Mashelkar Committee voiced its views in favor of incremental innovation and held that certain provisions of the Indian Patent Act are not compliant with international agreements, specifically WTO’s TRIPS Agreement (Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights). India is a part of the WTO
We thank you for your interest. For more information about this topic and about our extensive corporate responsibility and patient access programs, please visit
http://www.novartis.com/about-novartis/corporate-citizenship/index.shtml
Yours sincerely,
Head of Global Public Affairs
Novartis International AG
