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

這頁面没有繁體中文版本,現以繁體中文顯示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:

企業回應

Abbott Laboratories

没有回應

AbbVie

没有回應

Allergan 瀏覽回應
Amgen

没有回應

AstraZeneca 瀏覽回應
Baxter International 瀏覽回應
Bayer 瀏覽回應
Boehringer Ingelheim 瀏覽回應
Bristol-Myers Squibb 瀏覽回應
Covidien 瀏覽回應
Eli Lilly 瀏覽回應
Ferring Pharmaceuticals

没有回應

Galderma 瀏覽回應
GE Health (part of General Electric) 瀏覽回應
Johnson & Johnson 瀏覽回應
Merck 瀏覽回應
Norgine Pharmaceuticals 瀏覽回應
Novartis 瀏覽回應
Novo Nordisk (part of Novo Group) 瀏覽回應
Pfizer 瀏覽回應
Sanofi

没有回應

Servier

没有回應

Takeda Pharmaceutical 瀏覽回應

Story Timeline