This is an example of the Customs FUD, I guess. Aiming for stronger IPR protection in order to combat this huge problem of "counterfeit drugs" (in the sense of drugs that have not been checked for fulfilling the requirements of health agencies on being safe for human consumption) is, at best, counterproductive since it targets a different problem (namely, not that of unsafe drugs flooding markets, but that of IPR infringement). I mean, look at this also: Mexican generics producers want 180 days of market exclusivity after the patent exclusivity for the original manufacturer expires. This is clearly not a question of general drug safety, but of keeping the market closed from competition.
Does anyone know what happened with this last proposal actually? Did the generics providers get what they wanted?
This is an example of the Customs FUD, I guess. Aiming for stronger IPR protection in order to combat this huge problem of "counterfeit drugs" (in the sense of drugs that have not been checked for fulfilling the requirements of health agencies on being safe for human consumption) is, at best, counterproductive since it targets a different problem (namely, not that of unsafe drugs flooding markets, but that of IPR infringement). I mean, look at this also: Mexican generics producers want 180 days of market exclusivity after the patent exclusivity for the original manufacturer expires. This is clearly not a question of general drug safety, but of keeping the market closed from competition.
Does anyone know what happened with this last proposal actually? Did the generics providers get what they wanted?