A potential TPP gotcha

Forums › ICT Policies and Regulation › A potential TPP gotcha

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | ... | 22

2886 posts

Uber Geek

#1392291 22-Sep-2015 22:29

itxtme:

Surely you can see the effect even a 1 year increase in patents will have on mortality rates and quality of living. Not an unknown at all.

Yes, actually it is. Your point is that longer patents will keep prices higher for longer, and this will reduce access somewhat with an impact on mortality. Which is a fair and valid point. However, there is also a counter argument that longer patents will incentivise more investment in drugs as compaines will have a longer window to make money and recover their costs, which should hopefully lead to accelerated discovery and availability of new medicines - reducing mortality. As to how this will ultimately come out on balance, I don't know.

Batman

Mad Scientist
29760 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1392293 22-Sep-2015 22:31

JimmyH:
itxtme:

Surely you can see the effect even a 1 year increase in patents will have on mortality rates and quality of living. Not an unknown at all.

Yes, actually it is. Your point is that longer patents will keep prices higher for longer, and this will reduce access somewhat with an impact on mortality. Which is a fair and valid point. However, there is also a counter argument that longer patents will incentivise more investment in drugs as compaines will have a longer window to make money and recover their costs, which should hopefully lead to accelerated discovery and availability of new medicines - reducing mortality. As to how this will ultimately come out on balance, I don't know.

huh? you think that's how drug companies think?
no. if they can make you sell your kidney to heal your leg they will.

JimmyH

2886 posts

Uber Geek

#1392294 22-Sep-2015 22:35

Fred99:
NorthernZone: Ref the opinions of medical specialists: I certainly agree that we should accord special weighting to their expert opinions in the areas of their professional expertise. But when their opinions stray into areas outside that, such as economics and international trade policy, then their opinions are surely of no greater value than any other lay person. Frankly I respect the professionalism and patriotism and experience of our trade negotiators to do their specialist job just as much as I respect the comparable expertise of oncologists or other medicos in their own areas.

Their expertise is much greater than any lay person when it come to expressing an opinion on the impact of the certainly of increased cost on their ability to prescribe medication - so please keep to topic. No, I don't expect them to express particularly valid opinion about the price of milk.

Trade treaties are complex deals that require quite a bit of economic expertise to understand. And they are pretty much always "on balance" deals, which involve signing up to some clauses that you would rather not have in return for getting the other side to sign up for the things you want.

Personally, I am about as likely to rely on economic advice from a medical specialist as I am to rely on medical advice from an economist.

Batman

Mad Scientist
29760 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1392335 22-Sep-2015 23:10

Medical specialists will never understand economics. Even economists don't.

But they understand the way drug companies work. By creaming the sick. To be fair, it's no worse than say, Apple. But you/your country don't have to buy an iphone if you do not wish to.
http://www.bbc.com/news/business-28212223

itxtme

2102 posts

Uber Geek

#1392368 23-Sep-2015 00:35

JimmyH:
itxtme:

Surely you can see the effect even a 1 year increase in patents will have on mortality rates and quality of living. Not an unknown at all.

Yes, actually it is. Your point is that longer patents will keep prices higher for longer, and this will reduce access somewhat with an impact on mortality. Which is a fair and valid point. However, there is also a counter argument that longer patents will incentivise more investment in drugs as compaines will have a longer window to make money and recover their costs, which should hopefully lead to accelerated discovery and availability of new medicines - reducing mortality. As to how this will ultimately come out on balance, I don't know.

Your argument made me physically laugh out loud. Drug companys do not act in this way. This is an indisputable fact. Check out the latest google news feed for the term 'Drug company profits' every article listed is about the prolific profits being made.Non of which are older than a few days!

The article that Joker97 has shown is famous for illustrating just what companies spend on R&D vs Advertising. It is disturbing to anyone, whether you work in that industry or not. Have a look at Gabapentin, the drug company involved in that is currently going through the courts for its reps marketing it for things it hasnt even been approved for!

Who is going to get rich from these deals every day NZers or the company owners? How many have received massive pay rises that the trickle down effect should have afforded us all in this "rock star" economy??

It is a very dangerous area to be increasing patent times. In 5, 10, 15 years time an extra 5 years on a drug patent will just be the norm, but the point is hundreds of thousands of NZers will still be paying the price of that agreement. Is that something to be taken lightly??

JWR

821 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1392378 23-Sep-2015 02:05

JimmyH:
itxtme:

Surely you can see the effect even a 1 year increase in patents will have on mortality rates and quality of living. Not an unknown at all.

Yes, actually it is. Your point is that longer patents will keep prices higher for longer, and this will reduce access somewhat with an impact on mortality. Which is a fair and valid point. However, there is also a counter argument that longer patents will incentivise more investment in drugs as compaines will have a longer window to make money and recover their costs, which should hopefully lead to accelerated discovery and availability of new medicines - reducing mortality. As to how this will ultimately come out on balance, I don't know.

No! It is the people who are suffering now that are important.

You say 'with an impact on mortality'.

I would say that you would have a different view if it was you facing your own mortality soon.

JWR

821 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1392379 23-Sep-2015 02:14

itxtme:
JimmyH:
itxtme:

Surely you can see the effect even a 1 year increase in patents will have on mortality rates and quality of living. Not an unknown at all.

Yes, actually it is. Your point is that longer patents will keep prices higher for longer, and this will reduce access somewhat with an impact on mortality. Which is a fair and valid point. However, there is also a counter argument that longer patents will incentivise more investment in drugs as compaines will have a longer window to make money and recover their costs, which should hopefully lead to accelerated discovery and availability of new medicines - reducing mortality. As to how this will ultimately come out on balance, I don't know.

Your argument made me physically laugh out loud. Drug companys do not act in this way. This is an indisputable fact. Check out the latest google news feed for the term 'Drug company profits' every article listed is about the prolific profits being made.Non of which are older than a few days!

The article that Joker97 has shown is famous for illustrating just what companies spend on R&D vs Advertising. It is disturbing to anyone, whether you work in that industry or not. Have a look at Gabapentin, the drug company involved in that is currently going through the courts for its reps marketing it for things it hasnt even been approved for!

Who is going to get rich from these deals every day NZers or the company owners? How many have received massive pay rises that the trickle down effect should have afforded us all in this "rock star" economy??

It is a very dangerous area to be increasing patent times. In 5, 10, 15 years time an extra 5 years on a drug patent will just be the norm, but the point is hundreds of thousands of NZers will still be paying the price of that agreement. Is that something to be taken lightly??

I have no doubt that if we accept longer patent times on drugs, then NZrs will die because of that.

That is a natural market-based outcome.

Since economics is driving all of this.

Equinox IT

Cloud spending continues to surge globally, but most organisations haven’t made the changes necessary to maximise the value and cost-efficiency benefits of their cloud investments. Download the whitepaper From Overspend to Advantage now.

frankv

5680 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1392408 23-Sep-2015 07:21

See also Recent Stuff article

Quadrupling the price of a 62-y-o drug, basically because they can.

scuwp

3885 posts

Uber Geek

#1392419 23-Sep-2015 07:42

I neither agree nor disagree on the points of views expressed over drug distribution. Longer patents for development and $$$ for research = better drugs faster, or shorter patents = availability of drugs cheaper for wider distribution.

I however come back to my first question...what does this have to specifically do with the TPPA? Laws can be easily changed to alter drug patent terms at any time, drug companies can decide at any time what they will charge for their product. Whether the TPPA comes in or not the same outcome is possible is it not? And given that the details of the TPPA are SECRET how can anyone know, be they a qualified medical expert, world class economist, or burger-flipper at the local MD's, the outcome until the ink on the paper is dry?

I get the concern, I just don't get how so many people are apparently experts on a supposed secret trade agreement? Or is it not so secret after all?

Lazy is such an ugly word, I prefer to call it selective participation

andrew027

1286 posts

Uber Geek

#1392437 23-Sep-2015 08:26

itxtme: Yep, its only once a drug is out of patient that Pharmac will be able to afford to fund it.

I have no comments on the TPPA - I just wanted to say how much I enjoyed that typo!

frankv

5680 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1392442 23-Sep-2015 08:49

scuwp: I neither agree nor disagree on the points of views expressed over drug distribution. Longer patents for development and $$$ for research = better drugs faster, or shorter patents = availability of drugs cheaper for wider distribution.

I however come back to my first question...what does this have to specifically do with the TPPA? Laws can be easily changed to alter drug patent terms at any time, drug companies can decide at any time what they will charge for their product. Whether the TPPA comes in or not the same outcome is possible is it not? And given that the details of the TPPA are SECRET how can anyone know, be they a qualified medical expert, world class economist, or burger-flipper at the local MD's, the outcome until the ink on the paper is dry?

I get the concern, I just don't get how so many people are apparently experts on a supposed secret trade agreement? Or is it not so secret after all?

One of the secret details of the TPPA that has been leaked (and not denied by John Key) is that the TPPA allows companies to sue Governments for any losses caused by law changes. So, laws WON'T be easily changed (except to provide even more profit to the corporations). Such a major change to the sovereignty of our nation needs to be openly discussed, not slipped in as a secret agreement that, once the ink is dry, can't be rescinded.

If the TPPA was such a good thing for Kiwis, why is it secret? Surely John Key would be trumpeting the goodness of it all to all and sundry. When a politician keeps something secret, it's because someone (usually the taxpayer) is getting shafted.

NorthernZone

69 posts

Master Geek

#1392459 23-Sep-2015 09:14

Lots of conspiracy theories here! Surely we can learn something from all our former trade agreements (none of which generated such widespread concern)?

A lot of scare-mongering has been published about the danger to a sovereign govt's right to pursue its own health and environmental policies (etc). Although I don't know the exact provisions of the TPP (of course), I note that several recent trade agreements have dealt with the same sort of issue and in every case there have been "carve out" positions whereby each country has protected its "sovereign rights" in certain areas. Since the Govt has repeatedly insisted that Pharmac, other health & environmental policies, will be fundamentally preserved, I infer they have placed such matters in their "carved out" area.

scuwp

3885 posts

Uber Geek

#1392497 23-Sep-2015 09:40

frankv:
scuwp: I neither agree nor disagree on the points of views expressed over drug distribution. Longer patents for development and $$$ for research = better drugs faster, or shorter patents = availability of drugs cheaper for wider distribution.

I however come back to my first question...what does this have to specifically do with the TPPA? Laws can be easily changed to alter drug patent terms at any time, drug companies can decide at any time what they will charge for their product. Whether the TPPA comes in or not the same outcome is possible is it not? And given that the details of the TPPA are SECRET how can anyone know, be they a qualified medical expert, world class economist, or burger-flipper at the local MD's, the outcome until the ink on the paper is dry?

I get the concern, I just don't get how so many people are apparently experts on a supposed secret trade agreement? Or is it not so secret after all?

One of the secret details of the TPPA that has been leaked (and not denied by John Key) is that the TPPA allows companies to sue Governments for any losses caused by law changes. So, laws WON'T be easily changed (except to provide even more profit to the corporations). Such a major change to the sovereignty of our nation needs to be openly discussed, not slipped in as a secret agreement that, once the ink is dry, can't be rescinded.

If the TPPA was such a good thing for Kiwis, why is it secret? Surely John Key would be trumpeting the goodness of it all to all and sundry. When a politician keeps something secret, it's because someone (usually the taxpayer) is getting shafted.

Conspiracy theorists playground here. Its secret because it it a trade/business negotiation. If the other parties knew our strategy or position then they could use that against NZ. I see nothing unusual in that.

Lazy is such an ugly word, I prefer to call it selective participation

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#1392541 23-Sep-2015 10:10

NorthernZone: Lots of conspiracy theories here! Surely we can learn something from all our former trade agreements (none of which generated such widespread concern)?

No we can't.
Previous FTAs didn't have acceptance and adoption of US IP rights to all other parties right at the core of negotiations.
That's not "secret" - it's been well and truly leaked already.

As for the need for secrecy on the impact of TPA on Pharmac, I call BS on that. It's abject BS.
By extension of the impact of patent extension on the industry, it might be possible to conclude that US Pharma companies will make more money, but it's a hell of a stretch from that to suggest that a "commercial advantage" prejudicing market negotiation justifies the level of secrecy. There are also significant negatives from that secrecy due to "doubt". If you wanted to invest in Pharma enterprise, would you do it now when you know that some select US Pharma corps (who may be your competitors) already have full access to the "secret" details and are involved in the "secret" negotiations?

The process is so rotten to the core, optimism about the outcome is misguided.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
18657 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1392554 23-Sep-2015 10:14

scuwp:

Conspiracy theorists playground here. Its secret because it it a trade/business negotiation. If the other parties knew our strategy or position then they could use that against NZ. I see nothing unusual in that.

That is a specious argument. In a trade negotiation this high powered, each party will have a battery of specialist strategists working out the repercussions of every possible stance of the opposing parties. The only ones this is a secret to are the public that will end up paying for it.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | ... | 22