During our time in India, we saw two different sides of the pharmaceutical battle. On the one hand, we visited Anand and Anand, a law firm specializing in patent law that represents many multinational pharmaceutical companies in India. On the other hand, we visited companies like Cipla and GSK, which produce generics in India, both for local use and exportation.
The battle between the two sides does not really have a good and an evil; rather, each side has its valid points. The multinationals feel that they need patent protection in order to recoup the costs of developing drugs, which takes many years and a large amount of capital investment.
The companies that create generics view their job as to feed affordable pharmaceuticals into the market, allowing those who could not otherwise afford medicine access.
Both sides make good points. The generic companies and the market would not have access to any pharmaceuticals if the multinationals did not spend money developing those drugs, which necessitates them to recoup their costs in order to reinvest. But, at such high costs, the middle- and low-classes in India can not afford access to those drugs.
One option which was discussed during several of our visits was the system of licensing patents. Generic companies would pay fees to multinational developers in order to have access to the patents for specific drugs, allowing the multinationals to recoup some of their costs while paving the way for generics to send low-price drugs into the market. However, this system would naturally raise the price for drugs coming from the generics - though likely not as high as those from multinationals with monopolies on the market.
No system is perfect. Heavy patent controls make pharmaceutical costs too high, low patent controls eliminate margins for multinational developers and would eventual eliminate innovation. India must find some middle ground in order to provide access for its people while still making pharmaceutical development worthwhile for multinationals without placing the burden of cost on other nations.
No comments:
Post a Comment