News Release

WHO'S Web-based public hearings: hijacked by pharmaceutical industry?

Peer-Reviewed Publication

The Lancet_DELETED

The manner in which pharmaceutical companies have apparently hijacked WHO's web-based public hearings into strategy to promote research and development for neglected diseases and access to medicines is explored in Correspondence published early Online and in an upcoming edition of The Lancet.

Dr Viroj Tangcharoensathien, Ministry of Public Health, Nonthaburi, Thailand, and colleagues have analysed submissions to the Intergovernmental Working Group (IGWG), set up by WHO to facilitate input from interested organisations.

Intellectual property (IP) attracted the most responses, with 43 of 68 submissions on this subject. The authors say: "Although we were not surprised to see that 11 of 12 organisations directly affiliated with the pharmaceutical industry supported strong IP protection, it was surprising that 14 patient advocacy groups took a similar position, which in several cases was the only point raised in their submissions; three professional associations also took similar positions."

The authors then investigated the sources of funding of these organisations using publicly available data, such as organisation websites and internet searches. They say: "For 11 of the 14 patient advocacy groups and all three professional associations, financial support had been received from pharmaceutical companies, either directly to the organisation or for activities undertaken by its executive director." They refer to a Canadian patient advocacy group shown to have been supported by various pharmaceutical companies, saying: "Additionally, we found near identical phrases or concepts in their submissions."

They conclude: "The problem of the pharmaceutical industry compromising patient advocacy groups is not new. In this case, we have serious doubts as the motives and credibility of these submissions to the public hearings. We strongly suggest that contributors to public hearings must disclose any conflicts of interest, as required of authors submitting papers to peer-reviewed journals."

A related Editorial in the print issue of this week's print edition of The Lancet discusses the perplexing problems of IP and how the decision to suspend the IGWG talks last week rather than rush through the controversial issues was welcomed by most member states representing low-income and middle-income countries.

The Editorial concludes: "People living in poor countries have the most to gain from the global strategy and plan of action but they also have the most to lose. The IGWG process must not be allowed to fail or falter however contentious the issues and however forceful, or manipulative, the opposition."

###

Dr Viroj Tangcharoensathien, Ministry of Public Health, Nonthaburi, Thailand T) + 66 2 590 23 66 E) virojm16@hotmail.com

The Lancet Press Office, T) +44 (0) 20 7424 4949 E) pressoffice@lancet.com

For more information: http://multimedia.thelancet.com/pdf/press/WHO.pdf


Disclaimer: AAAS and EurekAlert! are not responsible for the accuracy of news releases posted to EurekAlert! by contributing institutions or for the use of any information through the EurekAlert system.