|
Patients,
not Patents, need to be at heart of the health care debate
Barun Mitra
[A version of this article has appeared in The Indian
Express, January 28, 2004, and can be read here.
<http://www.indianexpress.com/full_story.php?content_id=63547>]
The
present debate over the Indian patent law has done a
disservice to the poor patients by shifting the focus away
from the more sickness that afflicts the health care system
in India. Its not patents but the government hold on the
healthcare sector that is preventing the poor from gaining
access to medicines.
The
present debate over the Indian patent law, despite the
passion, is underscored by the desire to score political
points. Consequently, most of the arguments have been
disconnected from reality.
India has been a proving ground for those who oppose patents
on pharmaceutical products. We scrapped all product patents
in 1972. As a result, India is now home to over 20,000
pharmaceutical companies producing copies of drugs developed
– and patented – elsewhere. However, access to medicines
remains poor – suggesting that patents are not the key
determinant of access that their opponents claim.
In
India, medicine represents between 10 and 15% of total
health care costs. This will not rise substantially when
product patents are introduced – for two reasons. First,
over 90% of the medicines in the Indian market are now
off-patent globally. Second, for most of those that would be
patentable, there are close alternatives available which
provide effective competition.
Poverty
and associated malnutrition dramatically exacerbates the
incidence of Malaria and TB – preventable diseases that
continue to play havoc in India decades after they were
eradicated in rich countries. Not because of patents. Poor
sanitation and polluted water sources prematurely end the
life of about 1 million children under the age of five every
year.
The
real reason for the lack of access to medicines and other
forms of healthcare is the prevailing stranglehold of
government regulation of health sector. Just as economic
regulation had strangulated development.
The
public sector healthcare provision is a sick joke,
characterised by shortages of hospitals, beds, equipments,
medicines, and manpower. Claims of medical negligence and
malpractice are frequent. Hospitals in India are often
dangerous places. In spite of the risk of infection with
HIV, the government of India recently admitted that 69% of
injections administered in public hospitals could be unsafe.
In the face of poverty, inadequate health care delivery
systems, and grossly inadequate sanitation systems, patents
should at best be at the periphery of the health care
debate, not at its centre. Yet many have argued that the
introduction of product patents will undermine access by
driving up prices of medicines.
Several
Health NGOs have claimed that AIDS patients will be
particularly adversely affected by the introduction of
product patents, saying that the price of medicine in India
is likely to shoot up.
The
New York Times added its weigh in a recent editorial which
argued that the poor in India and elsewhere will be denied
access to AIDS medicine if India amends its patent laws to
include product patent.
Yet
it is conveniently ignored the fact that barely 1% of the
estimated 3.5 million Indians with AIDS receive any kind of
treatment at all. Some international NGOs have added their
voice, saying that poor countries in Africa that import
cheap generic medicines from India may suffer. It is ironic
that these activists think Indian generic producers could
save lives in Africa, when the same companies fail to reach
out to patients at home. Clearly, for many NGOs, ideological
antipathy towards MNCs, patents and profitability in the
health sector takes priority over issues that actually
affect health care for the poor.
Even
if by some way, the world could bring down the prices of
medicines to zero, medicines will continue to elude the
poor. On the other hand, such a measure will only boost the
profitability of spurious drugs manufacturers around the
world, the murky merchants of death.
This
debate over patent has done a disservice to the poor
patients by shifting the focus away from the more sickness
that afflicts the health care system in India. Proper
delivery of medicine is dependent upon a lot of factors –
access to and availability of appropriate medical personnel,
diagnostic facilities, treatment regimen, regular
monitoring, diet and nutrition, etc. Without this basic
infrastructure, health care can hardly be delivered
effectively nor can medicine be administered properly.
Patent or not. Priced or not.
Left
wing political parties have also been vocal opponents of
pharmaceutical product patents warning about the danger of
the Indian health care system falling prey to profit seeking
multinational corporations. Yet, they ignore the fact that
most Indians dread the day they visit a public health
facility. By contrast, some of the private healthcare sector
in India is so well regarded that it is attracting ‘health
tourists’ from overseas. The policies of the leftists
would, ironically, perpetuate this two-tier system –
instead of enabling every Indian to access high quality
healthcare.
Political
expediency is at the fore among other mainstream political
parties. The present UPA government promulgated an ordinance
to amendment that would make the Indian patent law compliant
with WTO obligations in January 2005. The previous BJP-led
NDA government had accepted the WTO obligations. Ironically,
the then Commerce Minister who had originally introduced the
amendment in Parliament, in December 2003, now says that he
was misled about the implications of the bill, and has come
out in opposition.
Indian pharma sector claim that it is price competitiveness
will be compromised by the new patent law. Yet, many of them
complain that they need protection from Chinese generic and
bulk drug manufacturers. It should not come as a surprise
that some of the Indian companies showed more interest in
producing generic lifestyle drugs like Viagra, rather than
meet the basic health care needs of Indians.
The Indian pharmaceutical sector should take a leaf out of
the success of the information technology sector. Both based
their initial strategy on weak IP regime. But from its
inception, the IT sector aimed at the global market and soon
graduated from copying to seeking copyright protection for
their products. As a result, India’s IT industry is a
global force to be reckoned with and international IT majors
have invested in India, developed products specifically for
the Indian market at locally relevant prices.
In contrast, the Indian pharma sector was not only protected
from international competition, it was in effect subsidised
by a weak patent regime. In a new book, Intellectual
Property Rights: Beyond 2005, Bibek Debroy and Amir
Ullah Khan provide evidence that the lack of product patents
led to complacency on the part of domestic industry. The
industry succumbed to the temptation of using foreign
technology, tinkering with it only slightly to reduce
production costs and suit the Indian market.
With globalisation, several of the major India pharma
companies, including Ranbaxy and Dr Reddy’s, are
seeking to break out of this mould and rub shoulders with
the best in the world. This move is to be warmly welcomed
– but will only happen once the companies are able to
obtain patent protection for their product locally.
Then, the pharma industry will attract investors from
around the world.
Indian patients deserve
the best in the world. A deregulated and competitive health
sector will stimulate research and innovation, and make
quality service accessible to Indians. This will facilitate
more private sector provision of hospitals, laboratories,
manpower, insurance, and investment in R&D. Like in case
of software, this will optimise the utilisation of Indian
manpower in the pharma sector, and consequently the cost of
drug development and research will fall. And the whole world
will benefit.
Barun
Mitra is the director of Liberty Institute, an independent
think tank in Delhi. www.libertyindia.org
|