Good morning
The headlines:
- India and the Novartis Patent.
Link: #Dilemma.
Novartis has a cancer drug called Glivec that the Indian Supreme Court has declined to patent. Novartis is unhappy.
The Novartis Argument:
Glivec contains a molecule called “imatinib” which was well expensive to research and develop, but we did it anyway. And it’s now an effective and safe leukemia treatment. And yes – it was our best-selling product of 2012; but that’s besides the point because we’re here about the intellectual property principle. If you guys don’t get your patent law together, we may not research drugs for Indians.
The Indian Argument:
Bitches please. You know, and we know, that you patented an imatinib synthesis back in 1993. We don’t like evergreening here in India. You Novartis kids just want to make these small incremental changes to a drug without any real medical benefit, and then patent it again in order to extend your product life.
The Novartis comeback:
Guys – you are already producing the generics – so talking about “extending product life” is rubbish. That 1993 patent wasn’t even granted in India. Also, 90% of the supply of Glivec into India is donated FOR FREE through our programs. And breakthrough medication is rare – most medication is just an incremental improvement on older medications to make them better, safer and more effective. Are you just going to throw all of those patent applications out?
India’s Supreme Court:
Yes.
You can draw your own conclusions.
That’s all for now.
Have a good day.
