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

这页面没有简体中文版本,现以简体中文显示English

故事

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:

企业回应

Abbott Laboratories

没有回应

AbbVie

没有回应

Allergan 浏览回应
Amgen

没有回应

AstraZeneca 浏览回应
Baxter International 浏览回应
Bayer 浏览回应
Boehringer Ingelheim 浏览回应
Bristol-Myers Squibb 浏览回应
Covidien 浏览回应
Eli Lilly 浏览回应
Ferring Pharmaceuticals

没有回应

Galderma 浏览回应
GE Health (part of General Electric) 浏览回应
Johnson & Johnson 浏览回应
Merck 浏览回应
Norgine Pharmaceuticals 浏览回应
Novartis 浏览回应
Novo Nordisk (part of Novo Group) 浏览回应
Pfizer 浏览回应
Sanofi

没有回应

Servier

没有回应

Takeda Pharmaceutical 浏览回应

Story Timeline