Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1
ExpandMyMind

Novartis: India rejects patent plea for

7 posts in this topic

India's Supreme Court has rejected a plea by Novartis to patent an updated version of its cancer drug, Glivec.

The Swiss drugmaker had been denied a patent by Indian authorities on the grounds that the new version was only slightly different from the old.

The decision means generic drugmakers can continue to sell copies of the drug at a lower price in India, one of the fastest growing pharmaceutical markets.

Novartis said the decision "discourages future innovation in India".

"This ruling is a setback for patients that will hinder medical progress for diseases without effective treatment options," said Ranjit Shahani, vice-chairman and managing director of Novartis India.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-21991179

:clap:

Personally (and before anyone jumps all over my post here, know that I understand how unrealistic this would be at this moment in time. Or, more-so, how difficult such an ideal would be to adopt), I don't believe that companies should be able to patent and profit from technologies and treatments that can help to save lives, while the poor die because they cannot afford treatment. I know that patents are important, but human life is vastly more important. When you have Africans dying from AIDS due to extremely expensive treatments, and, hell, even some Americans die because they cannot afford healthcare (disgusting in such an advanced country), we really need to start looking at the whole system differently, like Doctors Without Borders and others are trying to get people to do.

I hold my hand up to countries that produce these drugs themselves and sell them for 90% less than those being sold in the current medical racket. And I can see a not-too-distant future where Americans (and others forced to pay for their own treatment) will be heading off to developing countries to get treatment - somewhat of a role-reversal!

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

While I would like to see many more drugs to combat cancer and other killers I don't see companies doing it for nothing. They are in business to make money. Research and development can be very expensive. The only way this is going to be done non-profit is if the tax payers pick up the tab.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.bbc.co.uk...siness-21991179

:clap:

Personally (and before anyone jumps all over my post here, know that I understand how unrealistic this would be at this moment in time. Or, more-so, how difficult such an ideal would be to adopt), I don't believe that companies should be able to patent and profit from technologies and treatments that can help to save lives, while the poor die because they cannot afford treatment. I know that patents are important, but human life is vastly more important. When you have Africans dying from AIDS due to extremely expensive treatments, and, hell, even some Americans die because they cannot afford healthcare (disgusting in such an advanced country), we really need to start looking at the whole system differently, like Doctors Without Borders and others are trying to get people to do.

I hold my hand up to countries that produce these drugs themselves and sell them for 90% less than those being sold in the current medical racket. And I can see a not-too-distant future where Americans (and others forced to pay for their own treatment) will be heading off to developing countries to get treatment - somewhat of a role-reversal!

I do not agree that no one should be able to make money off life saving treatments and I think patenting drugs and treatments are fine because that is what drives a lot of people to discover new treatments and people should be rewarded for their hard work. The thing I would like to see changed is pharmaceutical companies being awarded patents for drugs that are only slightly different from drugs where the patent ran out. That is really what this case is about. Pharmaceutical companies no longer put their immense resources into researching new drugs and instead spend all their time researching how to repatent old drugs. That practice helps no one and is just a waste.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think they are doing this because when a generic drug is made theirs will not be used.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a difference between making money off your work and setting the cost of drugs so high that few can afford them. Every time I see an advert for a drug made by AstraZeneca, they always say at the end "If you cannot afford your drugs, AstraZeneca may be able to help." That right there tells me they purposely inflate the cost of drugs far beyond the basic money making levels.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They just modify it a little bit so they can still keep the patent and make big $$, and there is no difference in the healing process with the previous one. This is a businesses tactic, that companies usually do, so they can keep the original patents to them self as long as they can!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think they are doing this because when a generic drug is made theirs will not be used.

I'm sure it still will be used. People who have money (and those who want to appear like they have it) are more than often willing to pay more for the Brand Name, no matter how the same it is.

Also, they can always throw zillions on advertising and “prove” the Brand Name is hundred thousand times better than the same generic drug.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.