Global Strategy and Plan of Action for Public Health, Innovation and Intellectual Property

A Student’s Perspective

Usman A. Mushtaq Vice president of External Affairs, International Federation of Medical Students Association

Youth commissioner, The Lancet-University of Oslo and Harvard Public Health School Commission on Global Governance for Health

World Health Summit 2012, Berlin

Are our innovation & intellectual property rights doing enough to empower LMICs to fight such a disease burden, or more importantly, to merge the growing gap in stark health inequities?

BUT

Rationale for the strategy

• Health inequity: Restricted sharing of biotechnical and intellectual advancement in LMICs--> bifurcates into richer countries with easier access vs. poorer with limited access.

• Chronic+infectious disease double-burden: Defeats the inherent purpose of innovation--> to ameliorate disease burden and improve health care accessibility and technical prowess in LMICs

BUT

Rationale for the strategy• Ethical & Human Rights Considerations:• The Universal Declaration of Human Rights:“Right

to share in scientific advancement and its benefits..".Denying access to advanced health care and resources is an ethical violation.

• Promote innovation in research and development paradigms unique to LMICs: Which will help in focused needs-based development and accessible medicines.

Implementation• Over 100 action points over a broad area involving

numerous governing bodies. • WHO passionately leading the work with progress

of implementation.• Many initiatives proposed,

• capacity building LMIC on utilizing the TRIPS flexibilities

• Open source licensing, patent pool, prizes • Was a step to the Consultative Expert Working

Group on Research and Development

Some Challenges• The strategy so broad that it makes it vague?

• Despite the increased focus on the issue of access and innovation, progress still remains slow.

• Many of the solutions lays outside the working area of WHO and falls under other global governing bodies

Paradoxes of Health and Trade

k on reconcile divergent interests?

• How do member states work on reconcile divergent interests?

• Do member states prioritize health over trade?

• How can interests around protection of knowledge for the sake of trade and investment be reconciled with efforts to produce global public goods?

Student-led advoacyIconic development

International Federation of Medical Students’ Associations

Student-led advoacyIconic development

Universities Allied for Essential Medicines

•UAEM Global Health Impact Report Card: Measures licensure and IP restrictions pertinent to Universities medical innovations.•Evaluates on three parameters:

• 1. Access: Are licensed/IP rights protected biomedical technologies developed by Universities accessible and affordable to LMICs?

Student-led advoacyIconic development

• 2. Innovation: How pertinent is the development to needs of LMICs double disease-burden or poverty afflictions?

• 3. Curriculum: Does the development do justice to academia's calling to promote global health education?

Student-led advoacyIconic development

Students from McMaster University

Looking ahead

Recommendations from the CEWG on R&D

John-Arne Røttingen, CEWG chair:

“If the price of health products continues to reflect the full cost of R&D products, these products will never be affordable for those that need them most. We therefore need to do two things: to delink the cost of research from the price of the product, and to develop mechanisms in addition to intellectual property rights to incentivize research investment in these diseases.”

Post 2015 development agenda

Where does the issue of access fit in?

Thank you for listening!