abusesaffiliationarrow-downarrow-leftarrow-rightarrow-upattack-typeburgerchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-upClock iconclosedeletedevelopment-povertydiscriminationdollardownloademailenvironmentexternal-linkfacebookfiltergenderglobegroupshealthinformation-outlineinformationinstagraminvestment-trade-globalisationissueslabourlanguagesShapeCombined Shapelocationmap-pinminusnewsorganisationotheroverviewpluspreviewprofilerefreshnewssearchsecurityPathtagticktooltiptwitteruniversalityweb

Diese Seite ist auf Deutsch nicht verfügbar und wird angezeigt aufEnglish

Story

Allegations of pharmaceutical group's planned opposition to So. Africa reforms to increase access to medicines

In January 2014, the Innovative Pharmaceutical Association of South Africa (IPASA) was accused of planning and funding an advocacy campaign on behalf of its member companies. The campaign allegedly sought to oppose South Africa’s efforts to introduce intellectual property law reforms that would allow for patents belonging to IPASA’s member companies to be limited, and for cheaper generic versions to be produced.

In a leaked email, Merck and other members of IPASA discussed the strategy.

Media items on the IPASA campaign:

 

Business & Human Rights Resource Centre invited IPASA and its member companies to respond:

Members companies' responses & non-responses:

  • Abbott [We have invited Abbott to respond and will indicate here whether it responds]
  • Abbvie [We have invited Abbvie to respond and will indicate here whether it responds]
  • Alcon (part of Novartis) Novartis responded [PDF] on behalf of itself and Alcon
  • Allergan did not respond
  • Amgen [We have invited Amgen to respond and will indicate here whether it responds]
  • AstraZeneca response [PDF]
  • Baxter response [PDF]
  • Bayer response [PDF]
  • Boehringer-Ingelheim response [PDF]
  • Bristol-Myers Squibb referred us to IPASA
  • Covidien [We have invited Covidien to respond and will indicate here whether it responds]
  • Eli Lilly [We have invited Eli Lilly to respond and will indicate here whether it responds]
  • Ferring [We have invited Ferring to respond and will indicate here whether it responds]
  • Galderma response [PDF]
  • GE Health reffered us to IPASA
  • Johnson & Johnson response [PDF]
  • Merck (MSD) response [PDF]
  • Novartis response [PDF]
  • Novo Nordisk response [PDF] indicates it resigned from IPASA following campaign proposal:
  • Norgine [We have invited Norgine to respond and will indicate here whether it responds]
  • Pfizer referred us to IPASA
  • Roche response [PDF] indicates it resigned from IPASA following campaign proposal
  • Sanofi-Aventis [We have invited Sanofi-Aventis to respond and will indicate here whether it responds]
  • Servier [We have invited Servier to respond and will indicate here whether it responds]
  • Takeda referred us to IPASA

 

Novo Nordisk and Roche resigned from IPASA:

Unternehmensantworten

Abbott Laboratories

Keine Antwort

AbbVie

Keine Antwort

Allergan Antwort anzeigen
Amgen

Keine Antwort

AstraZeneca Antwort anzeigen
Baxter International Antwort anzeigen
Boehringer Ingelheim Antwort anzeigen
Bristol-Myers Squibb Antwort anzeigen
Covidien Antwort anzeigen
Eli Lilly Antwort anzeigen
Ferring Pharmaceuticals

Keine Antwort

Galderma Antwort anzeigen
GE Health (part of General Electric) Antwort anzeigen
Johnson & Johnson Antwort anzeigen
Norgine Pharmaceuticals Antwort anzeigen
Novartis Antwort anzeigen
Novo Nordisk (part of Novo Group) Antwort anzeigen
Sanofi

Keine Antwort

Servier

Keine Antwort

Takeda Pharmaceutical Antwort anzeigen

Story Timeline