Archive

Asia

The Campaign Against Female Genital Mutilation (CAGeM) invites you to attend a conference on Saturday June 16, 2012 from 9am-6pm, at the New York Academy of Medicine (1216 Fifth Avenue).

FGM is an unacceptable non-medical practice that serves to preserve a female’s innocence or purity by altering the biological exterior of her genitals.  There are an estimated 100 to 160 million girls and women worldwide currently living with the consequences of the painful and traumatic procedure, and it is practiced approximately every 16 seconds.

In CAGeM’s full commitment towards stopping the clock and eradicating the practice of FGM globally, the conference on the 16th of June serves to inform the public of this atrocious procedure by providing various perspectives on the impact of FGM. Nana Sylla, a high school senior, is the driving force behind the conference, showcasing CAGeM’s mission of linking grassroots activism to inform the community about FGM. Speakers at the event will include human rights experts, physicians, legal professionals, religious scholars, and victims themselves. The conference aims to form a dialogue between communities and panelists in order to make the efforts toward eradicating this inhumanity a priority. Aside from panel discussions, there will also be a live Off-Broadway performance on FGM, with the use of theatrical pieces and films to inform viewers.

While, the largest proportion of girls and women who have undergone FGM are in Africa, we should not neglect the practices right here at home. Although the United States outlawed FGM in 1997, migrant communities continue to practice, with the second largest population in New York state. Survivors have provided testimonies of the practice occurring in the back of a barbershop in New York City, a least suspecting location. The conference’s setting in New York City on the 16th is an attempt to raise awareness and begin a dialogue to eliminate all FGM procedures. A 2010 proposal to the Supreme Court to outlaw transportation out of the country momentarily in order to have the practice done abroad is currently pending. This means that while it is illegal to practice it in this country, it is legal to take an American-born girl overseas for the procedure.

Most recently, FGM has been in the news regarding the launching of an anti-FGM campaign in the United Kingdom. An estimated 500 girls are taken out of the UK each year to get the procedure done elsewhere, and 2,000 girls in Bristol are thought to be at risk. In Kenya, laws banning FGM are failing to protect women, even though it is punishable by imprisonment and a fine.

It is important to restate that the practice is not medical in nature and therefore carries no medical benefits. Children born to mothers who have undergone the practice suffer high rates of neonatal death than compared to women who had not undergone the practice. Women themselves may have recurrent bladder infections, cysts, infertility, painful urination from the wound, and septicaemia (sepsis, a blood infection). Some may even die shortly after the procedure from hemorrhaging, sepsis, and shock. The procedure does not use anesthesia. Tools are used on more than one girl, therefore increasing the risk of  the transmission of HIV.

The practice of FGM is a gross violation and an infringement of human rights, including the lack of informed consent of the child or young adolescent, the right to be free from gender discrimination, the right to life and physical integrity, the right to health, and the right to be free from torture.

Come out to the conference on June 16, 2012 from 9am-6pm, at the New York Academy of Medicine (1216 Fifth Avenue). Listen to the voices of survivors, and together let us become the voice that speaks for those who cannot. Help us make sure that our message is not falling on deaf ears.

Register here.

Many drugs being used to treat Malaria in disease ridden areas could be substitutes, or could even be fake.

The Lancet Infectious Disease Journal reported that up to 42% of the Malaria drugs used in Southeast Asia or Sub-Saharan Africa could be ineffective, being either counterfeit medication, a substitute medication or just a placebo.

The governments of the countries where these ineffective drugs were discovered are being urged to regulate drug production more strictly.

People along the borders of Thailand and Myanmar have been found to carry a Malarial parasite that is immune to the best anti-Malarial drugs available, called artemisinin combination therapy, or ACT.  In Cambodia, drug resistant Malarial parasites were also discovered.  These new cases showing up along the borders of Thailand and Myanmar are different in the fact that it is a different parasite these patients are carrying.

“Anti-malarial control efforts are vitally dependent on artemisinin combination treatments,” says  Anne-Catrin Uhlemann and David Fidock of Columbia University.  “Should these regimens fail, no other drugs are ready for deployment, and drug development efforts are not expected to yield new antimalarials until the end of this decade.”

AFP reports that the Indian drug manufacturer Cipla will drastically reduce the price of three important cancer drugs — each of them under patent to one of the big western pharmaceutical firms.  With Cipla’s new pricing scheme, the drugs will be purchasable for about 25% of the price charged by the patent holders, Bayer, AstraZeneca, and Schering.

As the Wall Street Journal reports, the break point came when the Indian patent office required Bayer to grant a license to an Indian manufacturing firm (not Cipla, actually) for its liver/kidney cancer medication Nexavar.

The head of the European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations said that the companies would prefer to make drugs affordable through so-called tiered pricing schemes, wherein the price of a drug varies from country to country in regard to local cost of living.

In a 2009 article in Global Health magazine, Andrew Jack notes that some big pharmaceutical companies have lowered their prices to try to compete in the huge Indian market, including selling the diabetes drug Januvia (Merck) for one-fifth its US price.  GSK, Jack notes, even has different prices in different parts of India.

Tiered pricing or patent busting — a big problem remains unresolved:  even when prices are lowered to $100 per dose, many people can’t afford them.  Last year, an article in The Economist showed results of surveys by Abhijit Banerjee and Esther Duflo:  over 90% of respondents in rural India (and about 80% of Pakistanis, 70% of Bengladeshis, etc.) live on $2 a day or less.  For such households, the cost of a single dose of cancer medication — even at the Cipla price — is equivalent to weeks worth of food.

A Reuters article today describes the problem of access to cancer medications for India’s poor.  Even though India has allowed local manufacturers to make a cancer drug that is elsewhere patented by Bayer, and might allow the same to happen with Novartis’s Gleevec, many Indians are too poor to afford even the generic medications.

With around 40 percent of the population living below the poverty line, healthcare is an upper-middle-class luxury in much of India where spending in private clinics is four times the amount of that in government hospitals. The poorest would-be patients literally beg for treatment on the outside of a chronically underfunded and overstretched health system.

If compulsory licensing still leaves millions of people untreated, what else should be done?

A briefing paper issued by Doctors Without Borders (Médecins sans Frontières) takes issue with Novartis’s response to the contention that the company should not be granted a patent on the leukemia drug Gleevec in India.

Basically, the humanitarian organization disagrees with Novartis’s claim that there’s no connection between patent protection and drug cost/availability.  They explain their own experience, for instance with patent protection on AIDS meds:

When AIDS treatment first became available in the late 1990s, the price of first line patented AIDS medicines was—even after discounts—US$10,439 per patient per year. Millions died in developing countries, particularly in Africa, as prices were too high. Generic competition brought prices down, making treatment possible.

And, whereas Novartis argues that it should be able to have a monopoly on Gleevec in India because 40 other countries have recognized its patent, MSF says

Although the World Trade Organization’s (WTO’s) … TRIPS Agreement obliges all WTO members, including India, to grant patents on medicines, nothing obliges developing countries to replicate the patent systems of wealthy countries.

The Gleevec suit will be decided by an Indian court at the end of March.  Meanwhile, there’s a new development in a related case:  This week, India used compulsory licensing to grant the right to make a different cancer drug, sorafenib tosylate (used for kidney and liver cancers), breaking Bayer’s monopoly.

The director of MSF’s Access campaign said

When drug companies are price gouging and limiting availability, there is a consequence: the Patent Office can and will end monopoly powers to ensure access to important medicines. If this precedent is applied to other drugs and expanded to include exports, it would have a direct impact on affordability of medicines used by MSF and give a real boost to accessing the drugs that are critically needed in countries where we work

 

 

Today’s New York Times offers a long article on the case before India’s Supreme Court regarding licensing of off-patent versions of the leukemia drug imatinib.  Currently Novartis sells this under patent as Gleevec.  The article mentions the potential implication for availability not only of this effective cancer medication, but also for AIDS medications worldwide.  For the pro-patent case, the website IP Watch gives extensive coverage to the industry contentions and intellectual property aspects.

The results of a study published this week found that the use of clean delivery kits could lead to a decline in neonatal (newborn) deaths in South Asia.

The facts:

  • There are approximately 3.3 million neonatal deaths around the world each year, 15% of which are due to sepsis, a systematic bacterial infection in the blood stream that leads to organ damage, which is harmful to developing babies.
  • Thirty to forty percent of the time sepsis is contracted during delivery.
  • 65% of deliveries occur at home in South Asia without a trained birth attendant
  • The largest absolute number of newborn deaths occurs in South Asia, with India contributing a quarter of the world total.

The use of each additional kit of the 2,885 distributed, resulted in a 16% relative reduction of neonatal deaths. The delivery kit and clean delivery practices include soap for hand washing, use of sterilized blade, use of boiled thread and plastic sheet, and a clean string to tie the umbilical cord. The idea to distribute clean delivery kits works to stand in for one of the most important factors that contributes to neonatal deaths, the lack of trained birth attendants. In the bigger scheme of things, this would hopefully help us reach Millennium Development Goal 4, which is to reduce deaths in children under 5 years by two-thirds by 2015.

Read More