CIPIHCommission on Intellectual Property, Innovation and Health
Copyright 1988-2018, All rights reserved.
References in periodicals archive ?
(75.) The only exception was a background paper to CIPIH by Qian Jia on the contributions of traditional Chinese medicine.
The CIPIH Report (5) in fact goes on to add that increasing levels of IP protection will not reverse the neglect of R&D: "there is no evidence that the implementation of the TRIPS agreement in developing countries will significantly boost R&D in pharmaceutical on Type II, and particularly Type III diseases.
The CIPIH (5) has recommended that developing countries "adopt or effectively implement competition policies and apply the pro-competitive measures allowed under the TRIPS Agreement in order to prevent or remedy anti-competitive practices related to the use of medicinal patents".
The limited extent of pharmaceutical innovation and reward through poor-country patenting motivated the WHO CIPIH to make over sixty recommendations aimed at improving the international intellectual property system.
The CIPIH report states that "the economic problem is the lack of effective demand for health products needed by developing countries." (79) This statement effectively illustrates the fatal flaw in the current global patent system, where medical needs, unmatched by money, simply are not seen to constitute demands.
(201 202 203) Although the report fails to successfully make this case, its conclusions have, nevertheless, been promoted by some media, (204) and elevated within a recent draft WHO CIPIH resolution to the level of a proposed global strategy and plan of action.
(209) The Swiss chair of a World Health Assembly drafting group had even proposed to merge the CIPIH resolution with the prior Brazil-Kenya resolution (that called for alternatives to the current international I/P-patent framework) to accelerate commencement of this initiative.
We agree with the CIPIH sentiment that without access to the lifesaving products of drug company innovation, there can be no public health benefits -- in Honduras or in other poor countries of the world."
The studies of the CIPIH did not in practice find any evidence that the implementation of the TRIPS agreement in the developing countries had significantly boosted research and development of pharmaceutical products.
As a consequence of the studies of the CIPIH, the WHO created, through its Resolution WHA59.24, the Intergovernmental Working Group on Public Health, Intellectual Property and Innovation (IGWG), which asked the Director-General of the UN to establish an intergovernmental workgroup open to all member States interested in developing a global strategy and a plan of action that would, specifically, ensure a greater and sustainable base for the needs of research and development in health, pertinent to the diseases that disproportionately affect the developing countries, proposing concrete objectives and clear priorities, and estimating the need for financing in this area (21).
Besides commissioning 22 studies on existing state of knowledge on the subject and to generate some new evidence, the CIPIH also received nearly 50 submissions from individuals and organizations.
As pointed out by the CIPIH (35), the TRIPS by imposing minimum standards of global IP protection, is theoretically one form of incentive for innovation in both developed and developing countries.