The Crier
Hot Commodities
Indonesia’s decision to stop supplying samples of avian influenza virus are evidence of a disturbing pharmaceutical trend
Eugene Morrow · The Empiricist · Feb 12, 2007
Email
Facebook
Digg
NewsvineLast Wednesday confirmed the twenty-seventh case of avian influenza in West Java since 2005. In response, the head of the West Java Health Office, Yudi Prayudha, announced that “the confirmation should remind us not to be negligent, since the danger of bird flu continues.”
Unfortunately, Mr. Prayudha’s superiors disagree.
That same day, Indonesia’s Health Ministry announced it would stop sending samples of the H5N1 virus to the World Health Organization. Instead, the samples will be sold to Baxter Healthcare, an American pharmaceutical firm. Indonesian health officials cited the need for equal compensation as the driving force behind the decision.
The samples, given for free to the WHO, are distributed to western pharmaceuticals for use in vaccine development. But the trend is for big drug companies to sell these vaccines at costs well above what is affordable for the average Indonesian. With many experts predicting an avian influenza pandemic, Indonesia rightly fears that the vaccines it’s helping develop will be unaffordable for its citizens.
What’s most lamentable about all this isn’t the direct impact on avian flu research. What Indonesia’s decision highlights is the sacrifice of ethics for profit.
A move as dramatic as Indonesia’s was likely necessary to jumpstart a meaningful debate on this topic. Still, their decision deserves scrutiny. Global surveillance of flu strains is paramount to the WHO’s ability to predict and prevent pandemics. Incomplete surveillance means it will be difficult to protect not just Indonesia, but every at-risk country. Indonesians may have good reason for wanting compensation, but their cooperation with worldwide health initiatives should not be used as leverage for obtaining it.
What’s most lamentable about all this isn’t the direct impact on avian flu research. What Indonesia’s decision highlights is the sacrifice of ethics for profit. While Indonesia’s deal with Baxter does not require it to stop donating samples, Indonesia likely sees it as such. It would be hard to force other pharmaceutical companies to bargain if the WHO were handing out samples for free.
And that’s why the majority of blame rests not with Indonesia, but with the drug industry’s ever-greater emphasis on the bottom line. Pfizer’s Trovan, GSK’s Paxil, and Merck’s Vioxx are all evidence of a prevailing disregard for ethical science in favor of an extra few billion dollars. Such an ideology forces the hands of developing nations like Indonesia.
Science runs on collaboration. The old model of opaque, marketing-based strategies must give way to increased emphasis on open, efficient science.
This pervasiveness makes a solution difficult, but not impossible. First and foremost, the WHO should issue guidelines on vaccine distribution — guidelines that include setting aside free vaccine for developing nations. This will likely require a good deal of political jockeying. But Indonesia’s decision, while ethically questionable, has provided the impetus for discussion. Increased pressure to assuage fears of vaccine inaccessibility may provide the necessary motivation.
Fixing the system of incentives that created the problem will be more difficult. First, patent laws should be restructured. The current system of allowing nearly endless patent renewals stifles competition, discourages innovation and keeps prescription drug prices artificially high. Increased transparency would also help. That Merck was able to hide the data on Vioxx for as long as it did is reprehensible.
These changes will likely take time, but are looking more likely. The drug industry is in trouble. Continued layoffs at Pfizer, stagnant drug development pipelines, and falling stock prices are just a few indicators. As things get worse for the pharmaceutical companies, they are seeking novel ways to restore competitiveness.
Science runs on collaboration. The old model of opaque, marketing-based strategies must give way to increased emphasis on open, efficient science. It’s only a matter of time before the drug companies realize this.
1. Elephant McGee says,
Feb 14, 2007 @ 6:39 PM
HELLO EUGENE MORROW i know this article is about malaysia and not climate change but i wanted to tell you i was reading my michigan daily today (the newspaper with one-hundred-seventeen years of editorial freedom) and i saw this quote “[the police] advised students to travel in cars as much as possible late at night”, and i think that proves that the government wants there to be some climate change so that the pharmaceutical companies can get some money off of the sunblock. also i saw this quote “Anberay was design in 1923 by joseph rousseau”, but that quote does not have anything to do with your articles.