Developed cancer drug for 'western patients' who could afford, not 'for Indians': Bayer's CEO

[MarkusS]

The main problem indians don´t understand are,

thats they hurt themself with this theft. But beside that, it also hurts their other interests.

Germany planned to help in Bhopal last year and wanted lead a decontamination project. We cancelled it. It is not in our interest to help indians in any way

 

[Kloitra]

I'm no expert on it, but as far as i understand it, it slows the propagation of cancer cells through the body, but doesn't kill them.

I am not really sure govt would just make a medicine more accessible which only prolongs the suffering.

 

[gambit]

But that is where you are making a false equivalence. Indian companies making generics does not equate to ''stealing'' even one cent from a millionaire. Nobody is taking anything away from Bayer. They can keep all the drugs they produce, or sell them to Europeans for whatever price they choose. Nobody is taking that freedom away from them. All we are doing is producing the same thing in India for a fraction of the price, and selling it to people who couldn't have bought from Bayer. How are we stealing anything?

In short - nobody is taking anything away from bayer. Not a single pill, not a single cent.

The theft here is largely intangible. Again, it goes back to the idea of 'intellectual property' in the first place. Natco Pharma is not physically taking anything from Bayer but NP is benefiting from Bayer's labor, even though NP's own labor is producing the same product. Bayer's objection is that it has no say in this partnership and when I am forced to allow someone else to profit from my intellectual labor, that is effectively theft of the fruits of my labor.

Excellent example you have quoted... I support the innovation and contribution to the healthcare system by doing so. But does the comments made by Bayer CEO justify the whole Idea of Indians being treated of with prejudice??

The 'prejudice' here is price based, nothing nefarious about it. The price of the drug is based upon some calculations that says Bayer needs to charge X amount in order to recoup its initial investments.

As a American, whats is your perspective towards such healthcare system if health insurance taken out of equation??

If people cannot afford to pay, either with their own money or from a pool, then nothing will ever get produced. So the argument positing the removal of health insurance is pointless. The only way you can have that is to legally prevent the creation of health risk insurance pool in the first place, then have the government runs everything. So as American, I would object to that. But once you allow people the freedom to create risk pools, be it for cars or health care, then entrepreneurs will create products, from cars to drugs.

 

[gambit]

The Indian government has the right to force an entity (Indian or foreign) perform acts which may affect (in any manner, positive or negatively) certain other entities (Indian or foreign) within its jurisdiction, till its legal, under local/international law.

I didn't knew this right is ever questionable, given all the governments over the globe use it in one way or the other. In fact this is far more legal and moral than certain machinations employed by many countries to achieve their purpose.

Only thing you can question is the effect of this action in short and long term, on India and others.

While it is true, as you mentioned, that it would impinge on the right of the company to determine its profits/sales etc. But does it truly affects the financial health of the company? Is the impact big enough to bring down (to any extent) the ongoing R&D by the company? If not, than the only question remains is about the morality of the decision. Whether the rights of one company holds more value than the lives of thousands, if not hundred of thousands of people.

Do this often enough, and it will discourage others from investments into the host country. So if I decide to take my millions to Switzerland, does it mean the government have the legal right to take one million dollars from every millionaires and billionaires under its jurisdiction? Absolutely, if the government make a law allowing it to do so. It would not affect my lifestyle much, if any effects at all. May be I can have only one butler for my palace instead of one butler for the top floor and one for the bottom floor. But once you tread into this territory, be prepare to deal with the consequences and mistrust inevitably produced.

 

[cloud_9]

LOL! How many people can pay for these kind of medicines where there is no Medicare and I'm not really sure if Medicare subsidies cover this drug.

$96,000 for a years course Yeah! there are plenty in the western world that can pay that kind of amount

 

[drunken-monke]

LOL! How many people can pay for these kind of medicines where there is no Medicare and I'm not really sure if Medicare subsidies cover this drug.

$96,000 for a years course Yeah! there are plenty in the western world that can pay that kind of amount

The point is not who can pay.. The ultimate extension of life is not more than 2 months (approx) with additions of chemotherapy related adverse effects... Is it worth that?? (I am considering the benefit vs Adverse effect scenario)..

 

[MarkusS]

LOL! How many people can pay for these kind of medicines where there is no Medicare and I'm not really sure if Medicare subsidies cover this drug.

$96,000 for a years course Yeah! there are plenty in the western world that can pay that kind of amount

in germany our medicare system covers it easily. Why is india unable to create an advanced medicare system?

 

[Audio]

I am not really sure govt would just make a medicine more accessible which only prolongs the suffering.

Well, that's what it does, you can read more about it. And coincidentally, this phrase you have written- prolonging the suffering- is exactly my stance on it as well. As i've seen cancer patient in last stage and it's not pretty.

 

[kṣamā]

I have been reading a lot through this thread. I am no chemist neither am I a doc. But I happen to go through the traumas of cancer and related chemo therapy. If you ask me if this drug is good for patient (the cheap variety in its best quality), I would rather say YES, even knowing very well that it may just increase my life by 60 days. By my own cold experience, cancer is not a battle between the docs with costly meds V/S Cancer, its also between your will power V/s your body.

Even when all hope is lost, everyone is given away, miracles can happen. Its not God or "Second chances". Its just your own Brain. It is The MASTER of your body. A very small positive results from the drug is good enough to hand one back his/her fighting spirit. Plus I am not considering the moral bost it provides to family and frnds around you. This is a circular logic.

I have been there.Felt all the stages. And came back alive. Even if it prolongs life for 24 hrs more, I will want my loved one to be me with for 1 more day. And if it was to me I would have personally burnt all the patents pertaining to Life saving drugs, the Hyper-sale of these drugs to huge market with with minimal profits would return quadruple the R&D costs.

Remember these are life saving drugs. Except the initial approvals, I donn think they even require a sexy babe to advertise them. If they work as written on the can and are affordable they will be bought off the shelves under a day.

 

[drunken-monke]

I have been reading a lot through this thread. I am no chemist neither am I a doc. But I happen to go through the traumas of cancer and related chemo therapy. If you ask me if this drug is good for patient (the cheap variety in its best quality), I would rather say YES, even knowing very well that it may just increase my life by 60 days. By my own cold experience, cancer is not a battle between the docs with costly meds V/S Cancer, its also between your will power V/s your body.

Even when all hope is lost, everyone is given away, miracles can happen. Its not God or "Second chances". Its just your own Brain. It is The MASTER of your body. A very small positive results from the drug is good enough to hand one back his/her fighting spirit. Plus I am not considering the moral bost it provides to family and frnds around you. This is a circular logic.

I have been there.Felt all the stages. And came back alive. Even if it prolongs life for 24 hrs more, I will want my loved one to be me with for 1 more day. And if it was to me I would have personally burnt all the patents pertaining to Life saving drugs, the Hyper-sale of these drugs to huge market with with minimal profits would return quadruple the R&D costs.

Remember these are life saving drugs. Except the initial approvals, I donn think they even require a sexy babe to advertise them. If they work as written on the can and are affordable they will be bought off the shelves under a day.

You are talking about truth my friend... My maternal aunt was suffered from Ovarian cancer 3 years back at stage 2.. With proper Chemotherapy, surgery and Indian medicines she survived and enjoying the life... The most important was the family support of all and making her mind to live long for the daughters and son (of her brother in law).. Its fight between your body and will power and no medicine can substitute your will power...

 

[pursuit of happiness]

The main problem indians don´t understand are,

thats they hurt themself with this theft. But beside that, it also hurts their other interests.

Germany planned to help in Bhopal last year and wanted lead a decontamination project. We cancelled it. It is not in our interest to help indians in any way

we have high regards for Germany.. but making that g8 country so smallll....
please dont help ...
you need to help yourself.. you know what happening in EU..

 

[pursuit of happiness]

@Markus..

"Even if it prolongs life for 24 hrs more, I will want my loved one to be me with for 1 more day." comment by ksama

is crux of argument... we value life .. what you will .. you decide.

we you think is it theft please read and answer,
theft- is unauthorized, non consensual act of taking away something which one dont belongs.
Compulsory Lic is authorized by WTO and consent in elite national level negotiation...
please read and answer if you think is it theft...
if you can able to put your point .. i will write to GOI for this case...
1.can you tell me why your head of state accepted CL in WTO? can you explain?
2.can you explain this?
WTO | intellectual property (TRIPS) - TRIPS and public health: Compulsory licensing of pharmaceuticals and TRIPS
Does there have to be an emergency?

Not necessarily. This is a common misunderstanding. The TRIPS Agreement does not specifically list the reasons that might be used to justify compulsory licensing. However, the Doha Declaration on TRIPS and Public Health confirms that countries are free to determine the grounds for granting compulsory licences.

Is this the same as tearing up the patent?

No. The patent owner still has rights over the patent, including a right to be paid for the authorized copies of the products.

in germany our medicare system covers it easily. Why is india unable to create an advanced medicare system?

please see indias population.,..PPP $ ,
we are trying to put in system...

 

[MarkusS]

we have high regards for Germany.. but making that g8 country so smallll....
please dont help ...
you need to help yourself.. you know what happening in EU..

What is happening? Germany is in an economic power like never before and all otehr european nations are rising in economy again. Ireland, Portugal left the ESM and have stable economies. Italy showed positive numbers recently and even greece shows positive development.

Chancellor Merkels austerity politics were right.

 

[Kloitra]

Do this often enough, and it will discourage others from investments into the host country. So if I decide to take my millions to Switzerland, does it mean the government have the legal right to take one million dollars from every millionaires and billionaires under its jurisdiction? Absolutely, if the government make a law allowing it to do so. It would not affect my lifestyle much, if any effects at all. May be I can have only one butler for my palace instead of one butler for the top floor and one for the bottom floor. But once you tread into this territory, be prepare to deal with the consequences and mistrust inevitably produced.

There certainly is no argument that this step generated a lot of mistrust. Bayer's CEO's comment is reflective of that. But the decision has an moral basis. As I said, the choice between lives and profits. There was not a right or wrong. Govt decided to give importance to one over the other.

Well, that's what it does, you can read more about it. And coincidentally, this phrase you have written- prolonging the suffering- is exactly my stance on it as well. As i've seen cancer patient in last stage and it's not pretty.

It than becomes an ethical dilemma. Like euthanasia. As someone pointed above, even a 2 month longevity might bring some miracles.

 

[MarkusS]

There certainly is no argument that this step generated a lot of mistrust. Bayer's CEO's comment is reflective of that. But the decision has an moral basis. As I said, the choice between lives and profits. There was not a right or wrong. Govt decided to give importance to one over the other.



It than becomes an ethical dilemma. Like euthanasia. As someone pointed above, even a 2 month longevity might bring some miracles.

You see it as moral to slow down future research so more people die in the long run? Explain that