我国经济要和国际接轨似乎必须考虑加入美国主导的TPP, 但TPP的智财至上条款恐怕会对健保药价构成强烈威胁, 然後总额有限的情况下,矛头可能又转向弱势医疗劳动业... 下面来看看近期NEJM对TPP的观点 The Trans-Pacific Partnership — Is It Bad for Your Health? http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp1506158?query=TOC The full health implications of the TPP are hard to judge, not only because its provisions are complex but also because the draft text is a closely held secret. Even members of the U.S. Congress can see it only if they agree not to talk publicly about it and if they leave their pens and phones (and, until recently, their expert staffers) at the door. But several key chapters have recently been leaked and reveal that the TPP could have a substantial impact on health. (本段说明TPP草案仍是黑箱状态,连美国国会议员都必须承诺不公开讨论才能看) Groups including Medecins sans Frontieres and Oxfam warn, for example, that the agreement could threaten the lives of millions of people in developing countries. Their concerns stem primarily from the leaked IP chapter and the effect that patents have on the prices of medicines. In the context of human immunodeficiency virus, for example, patents increase the annual cost of antiretroviral therapy from around $100 per person to $10,000 per person. (HIV每人ART药价翻100倍) For example, India allows patents on new drugs but not on new uses of old drugs or new forms of known drugs that do not increase therapeutic efficacy. These provisions have paved the way for generic versions of lifesaving drugs such as the cancer treatment imatinib mesylate (Gleevec) in that country.1 But such limits on patent eligibility could be outlawed by the TPP. Reports suggest that there may be some kind of phase-in period for developing-country members, but only for some parts of the agreement. (印度只承认新药专利,不接受旧药新用或者没增加疗效的旧药新剂型,但这违反TPP) Though it is less widely recognized, the TPP could also have a direct effect on health in developed countries. For example, the leaked IP chapter contemplates major extensions of “data exclusivity” provisions. These laws prevent drug regulatory agencies like the Food and Drug Administration from registering a generic version of a drug for a certain number of years — and as a result can substantially affect the prices of medicines. (药品资料专属权让专利期过後还得过一定年限学名药才能申请药证) 评: 这根本是变相延长专利垄断期... 因为学名药厂必须要重新跑一遍药品开发过程非常花钱的phase 1-4的trial, 但花大笔钱跑完後却没有原厂当初跑完可以得到的专利权,可能血本无归, 多数药厂应该会直接放弃进入市场,原厂将可以继续保有市场垄断地位... 总结来说, 自由主义的美国却总是动用政府间契约威权强制来保障少数大药厂的垄断利益... --

※ 发信站: 批踢踢实业坊(ptt.cc), 来自: 123.192.164.117 ※ 文章网址: https://webptt.com/cn.aspx?n=bbs/medache/M.1434020325.A.193.html 文中举印度的例子,应该不是说印度要卖一堆学名药到国际上, 而是缔约国都必须修改国内法配合TPP... 药品智慧财产权的另一种保护？谈「资料专属权」（Data Exclusivity） http://tinyurl.com/q2djv3x http://www2.cde.org.tw/Data/CDEDoc/Documents/%E8%97%A5%E5%93%81%E6%99%BA%E6%85%A7%E8%B2%A1%E7%94%A2%E6%AC%8A%E7%9A%84%E5%8F%A6%E4%B8%80%E7%A8%AE%E4%BF%9D%E8%AD%B7%20%E8%AB%87%E8%B3%87%E6%96%99%E5%B0%88%E5%B1%AC%E6%AC%8A.pdf WTO条文中没有药品资料专属权,都还被那些利益团体透过各种管道施压, 现在可能连新适应症的专属权都要明文写在TPP里面, 一旦缔约就不太可能不配合修法... ※ 编辑: hahawow (123.192.164.117), 06/12/2015 16:18:18