Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Can Pharmaceuticals Save the Third World?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Can Pharmaceuticals Save the Third World?

    Disturbing ARTICLE on the BBC today. The article in part:

    Anti-malaria drugs which save hundreds of thousands of lives every year are at risk of becoming useless, because of new counterfeiting tactics.
    Experts have discovered counterfeiters in South East Asia are producing dilute fake versions of the drugs - raising the risk of resistance.

    The drugs are based on compounds from the Chinese plant Artemesinin.

    They are the only cheap drugs to which the most deadly malaria parasite has not developed resistance.

    As such, they are a vital plank in the global fight against a disease which kills over a million people every year.

    The fake versions being produced by counterfeiters do not contain enough of the active ingredient to kill the malaria parasite, falciparum.

    So exposure to it gives the malaria the chance to develop resistance.

    Paul Newton, a malaria expert from Oxford University, based in South East Asia, said: "This would be a disaster for malaria control globally.

    "We may have malaria that could not be treated in any affordable way."
    Dr François Nosten, of the Shoklo Malaria Research Unit on the Thai-Burma border, said artemesinin-based drugs were "irreplaceable".

    "They are very cheap, and very, very effective and work anywhere in the world. It can mean life or death for millions of people."

    A recent study found over half of all the drug Artesunate sold in Laos, Cambodia, Vietnam and Burma is fake.

    It is believed the drug counterfeiters have begun adding small amounts of the active ingredient to their product to try and fool simple dye tests which test the veracity of artesunate.

    These tests are widely used in South East Asia but they can only determine whether the active ingredient is present in the drug, not the amount.
    So as I understand it,
    This is a drug that treats a disease (malaria) that is widespread in the third world.
    The drug is cheap.
    The drug is effective.
    The drug is being counterfeited in a way that raises resistance to the real drug.
    Increased resistance would make public health initiatives much less effective or more expensive.

    How many other diseases that are prevalent in the third world might have this type of problem?
    Does this case lend support to the drug companies argument that safe and secure distribution systems are at least as important as the availability of cheap generics?
    Note that the price of the drug does not appear to be an issue here, first because everybody pretty much agrees the drug is inexpensive, and second because no matter how inexpensive the drug is, it is possible to make a cheaper counterfeit by diluting the dose.
    Old posters never die.
    They j.u.s.t..f..a..d..e...a...w...a...y....

  • #2
    I would say it lends credence to the importance of regulation of the industry; whether this is necessarily focused on a "safe secure distribution system", I am not certain.

    It is fascinating that something so cheap would be worth counterfeiting.

    I would suggest that the penalty for manufacturing counterfeit malaria drugs should be no less than life imprisonment, as it is a wilful conspiracy to cause many deaths.

    Short of investigating and prosecuting counterfeitors, I don't see how you solve the problem. They already have holograms, for crying out loud.

    What models of distribution system are being proposed?
    Best MMORPG on the net: www.cyberdunk.com?ref=310845

    An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind. -Gandhi

    Comment


    • #3
      remember it's the BBC
      I will never understand why some people on Apolyton find you so clever. You're predictable, mundane, and a google-whore and the most observant of us all know this. Your battles of "wits" rely on obscurity and whenever you fail to find something sufficiently obscure, like this, you just act like a 5 year old. Congratulations, molly.

      Asher on molly bloom

      Comment


      • #4
        What's wrong with the BBC

        Comment


        • #5
          What's wrong with the BBC

          please tell me you were just kidding
          I will never understand why some people on Apolyton find you so clever. You're predictable, mundane, and a google-whore and the most observant of us all know this. Your battles of "wits" rely on obscurity and whenever you fail to find something sufficiently obscure, like this, you just act like a 5 year old. Congratulations, molly.

          Asher on molly bloom

          Comment


          • #6
            No.

            Comment


            • #7
              OK, here are World Health Organization and US Centers for Disease Control links to the same effect. Note that the WHO link mentions a bunch of other diseases aside from malaria.

              Originally posted by The Mad Viking
              It is fascinating that something so cheap would be worth counterfeiting.
              That's what struck me too.

              Originally posted by The Mad Viking
              What models of distribution system are being proposed?
              I don't know what is being proposed. One possible solution would be to use exclusive or near exclusive dealing arrangements, coupled with stepped up enforcement. Pick three to five manufacturers world wide who are solely licensed to make the product, along with two or three distributrors in each country who are solely licensed to distribute the product. Distributors must buy from these manufacturers, consumers must buy from these distributors. No resale or transhipment allowed. This might generate some monopoly profits, but the product quality justification looks pretty compelling.

              edit: formatting
              Old posters never die.
              They j.u.s.t..f..a..d..e...a...w...a...y....

              Comment


              • #8
                Pharmaceutical companies don't care about the Third World. They just care about making a profit.

                Just saw something about this movie:
                Civilization II: maps, guides, links, scenarios, patches and utilities (+ Civ2Tech and CivEngineer)

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Mercator
                  Pharmaceutical companies don't care about the Third World. They just care about making a profit.
                  QFT
                  To us, it is the BEAST.

                  Comment


                  • #10


                    And to prove his statement, he cites a movie!

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      It would be useful to quantify "cheap" here. Does cheap mean "compared to other medicine in the 1st world" or does cheap mean "affordable by people in malaria-ridden 3rd world countries"? Based on an excellent article I read recently in the New Yorker, about malaria and teh efforts of teh Gates Foundation, my guess is that even what we think of as "cheap" medicine is still not cheap enough for those in need -- hence the counterfeiting.
                      "I have as much authority as the pope. I just don't have as many people who believe it." — George Carlin

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Can Pharmaceuticals Save the Third World?

                        Mercator, Sava:

                        They are very cheap, and very, very effective and work anywhere in the world.
                        Originally posted by Adam Smith
                        Note that the price of the drug does not appear to be an issue here, first because everybody pretty much agrees the drug is inexpensive, and second because no matter how inexpensive the drug is, it is possible to make a cheaper counterfeit by diluting the dose.
                        Did either of you bother to read either the article or the opening post, or is that just beyond you?

                        Rufus:

                        xposted.

                        The Pan American Health Organization indicates that 2002 price was $1 per dose (1 dose = 1 course of treatment as best I understand it), with the price expected to fall to $0.35 per dose by 2004. I don't know how this compares to relevant third world income (or to budgets of health agencies), but it seems a bit difficult to imagine a treatment much cheaper than that. The next best alternative appears to be $2.40 per dose.

                        If we are having problems at these prices, can pharmaceuticals work for any other diseases?

                        edit: can't get the url to work
                        Last edited by Adam Smith; November 14, 2005, 20:55.
                        Old posters never die.
                        They j.u.s.t..f..a..d..e...a...w...a...y....

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          That's just sick...

                          But there's been similar problems in the third world for a long time, taking antibiotics just long enough for most of the symptoms to go away etc. etc.
                          Stop Quoting Ben

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Fair enough. Isn't it mainly a problem of having access to the drug then?

                            Originally posted by JohnT


                            And to prove his statement, he cites a movie!


                            I just stated a fact, so I wasn't trying to prove anything with that movie link I added. I just thought I'd bring it to people's attention. I didn't actually see the movie.
                            Civilization II: maps, guides, links, scenarios, patches and utilities (+ Civ2Tech and CivEngineer)

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by JohnT


                              And to prove his statement, he cites a movie!
                              Clearly a mark of an amateur. A master debater would surely of reconized that only a couple of smilies need be used to make one's point.
                              Rethink Refuse Reduce Reuse

                              Do It Ourselves

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X