t*******h
发帖数: 2882 | 1 http://allafrica.com/stories/201011090721.html
Africa: EU-India Deal Could Threaten Access to Essential HIV Drugs
9 November 2010
Nairobi — As Indian and European officials meet in Brussels to thrash out
the details of a Free Trade Agreement (FTA), civil society activists are
concerned the deal could mean tighter intellectual property protections that
could reduce access to cheap Indian generic drugs.
"The European Union is pushing for data exclusivity, which means Indian
generics manufacturers would no longer be able to use existing studies to
make identical drugs, a practice recommended by WHO [UN World health
Organization] - they would have to conduct their own clinical trials, which
would be unethical and redundant since we already have evidence that the
drug works, but also, the data exclusivity could last anywhere between five
and 10 years, delaying poor countries' access to these drugs for long
periods," Michelle Childs, director of policy and advocacy for Médecins
Sans Frontières' campaign for access to essential medicines, told IRIN/
PlusNews.
More than 80 percent of all donor-funded antiretroviral drugs used in
developing countries are Indian generics; the availability of cheap ARVs has
enabled more than five million people globally to access essential HIV
treatment. Until 2005, the country did not grant patents on medicines, but
World Trade Organization (WTO) rules now require India to grant patents.
Indian law only grants patents on drugs that show a therapeutic benefit over
existing ones; activists fear that trade agreements like the EU-India one
could override these public health concerns.
According to a 2010 study published in the Journal of the International AIDS
Society this year, "future scale-up using newly recommended ARVs will
likely be hampered until Indian generic producers can provide the dramatic
price reductions and improved formulations observed in the past". The
authors recommend that rather than agreeing to inappropriate intellectual
property obligations through FTAs, India and its trade partners "should
ensure that there is sufficient policy space for Indian pharmaceutical
manufacturers to continue their central role in supplying developing
countries with low-priced, quality-assured generic medicines".
Childs accused Europe of employing "dirty legal tricks" to circumvent India'
s public health protections and boost its own pharmaceutical industry, which
could have fatal consequences.
Data exclusivity could last anywhere between five and 10 years, delaying
poor countries' access to these drugs for long periods
However, European officials deny that the FTA with India will interfere with
the capacity of India's generics industry. The EU spokesman for trade, John
Clancy, told IRIN/PlusNews by email that the EU intended to follow the
Trade Related Aspects of International Property (TRIPS) laid out by the WTO,
which include - under the Doha Declaration - provisions for countries to
override intellectual property rights in the interests of public health.
For example, TRIPS gives countries the right, in specific situations such as
public health emergencies, to issue compulsory licences - an authorization
given by a government to a third party to produce a patented invention
without the permission of the patent-holder.
"Data exclusivity is an issue we are discussing with India but taking fully
into account India's specific needs and interests - such as India's legal
system, its policy developments, its developing country status and the role
it plays in producing generic medicines for the developing world," Clancy
said. "The [European] Commission explicitly recognizes India's right to
issue compulsory licences for life-saving medicines."
But Childs says on its own, data exclusivity is an example of TRIPS-plus,
which refers to tougher or more restrictive conditions than required by
TRIPS.
"Europe is using the fact that few people understand the technicalities of
TRIPS and the implications of data exclusivity to appear virtuous by
claiming that they will abide by the Doha Declaration while at the same time
tying India into an agreement that could make generics more expensive and
delay their access to people in the developing world who need them," she
said.
James Kamau, who has lived with HIV for more than a decade and heads the
Kenya Treatment Access Movement, says if India "got into bed" with Europe,
it could have catastrophic consequences for people living with HIV in Africa.
"This would be a marriage of convenience with a child called profit, but
this marriage would also result in death for many Africans, particularly
those who need newer, second-line drugs that may now take years to reach
them," he said. "This would not only affect HIV - most of the drugs we take
here are Indian generics, so anything that harms that industry harms the
health of millions in Africa." | i**b
发帖数: 918 | 2 印度的generic drug（仿制药）industry非常的不错。
that
【在 t*******h 的大作中提到】
: http://allafrica.com/stories/201011090721.html
: Africa: EU-India Deal Could Threaten Access to Essential HIV Drugs
: 9 November 2010
: Nairobi — As Indian and European officials meet in Brussels to thrash out
: the details of a Free Trade Agreement (FTA), civil society activists are
: concerned the deal could mean tighter intellectual property protections that
: could reduce access to cheap Indian generic drugs.
: "The European Union is pushing for data exclusivity, which means Indian
: generics manufacturers would no longer be able to use existing studies to
: make identical drugs, a practice recommended by WHO [UN World health
| c****g
发帖数: 37081 | 3 If not the best.
【在 i**b 的大作中提到】
: 印度的generic drug（仿制药）industry非常的不错。
:
: that
| v********e
发帖数: 1985 | | i*****T
发帖数: 1855 | 5 守着恒河的阿三能为美国供药，中国却不能，值得三思啊。 | F*****t
发帖数: 2580 | 6 欧美的大药厂肯定恨死3锅的仿造药厂了
按说大药厂有的是钱，咋没整几个lobbyists也弄个什么法案条款治3锅呢？ | xt
发帖数: 17532 | 7 制药工业需要有很多的化工原料，中国缺乏化工原料
【在 i*****T 的大作中提到】
: 守着恒河的阿三能为美国供药，中国却不能，值得三思啊。
| i*****T
发帖数: 1855 | 8 你错了，中国其实是出口原料药的，只不过成品药达不到要求，所以不能出口。所以不
是缺乏化工原料的问题。
【在 xt 的大作中提到】
: 制药工业需要有很多的化工原料，中国缺乏化工原料
| g**********0
发帖数: 886 | 9 粗略看到过一点这方面的报道，没核实过，欢迎修正补充
当初欧美制药企业在印投资办厂，实验室 ，蔚然成风， 除因为成本低 还相信印度对
其产权和配方的“法律保护”，以为印度被英帝消化了百余年，真就被他们规范化了。
结果老印大量复制他们的有效成分，并返销到他们的传统市场，强了他们的生意。
这时欧美企业开始要“讨说法”，印度法律的细则解释归印度立法，就讨到了保护的是
有效成分的合成方法，只要有一步不一样就不算违法的说法。 | g*******g
发帖数: 9753 | 10 你新警察？不知道婆罗门猫？
【在 i*****T 的大作中提到】
: 你错了，中国其实是出口原料药的，只不过成品药达不到要求，所以不能出口。所以不
: 是缺乏化工原料的问题。
| s********i
发帖数: 17328 | 11 generic的药是没有专利的。药的专利只有10几年的时间，很容易就过期了。 | g**********0
发帖数: 886 | 12 欧美制药业业在印度设厂实验室有他们的好处： 1.输出了污染大人力成本高的SECTION
, 2.有利
于做帐，高管与股市挂钩的利益来的快。 被老印山寨是这些利好的副作用。
下面这个报道说的是老印怎么用“法律”来忽悠的：
December 1, 2000
MEDICINE MERCHANTS / Pirated Pills
Selling Cheap 'Generic' Drugs, India's
Copycats Irk Industry
By DONALD G. McNEIL Jr.
Related Articles
• Issue in Depth: Medicine
Merchants
Forum
• Join a Discussion on Prescription
Medication
OMBAY — To anyone else, the room looks like the
unprepossessing office of a college science teacher.
But to the multinational pharmaceutical giants, it is the
lair of a pirate king.
Grinning proudly, he brandishes his trustiest weapon, the
scribbled notebooks he has kept since his days as a chemistry
student at Cambridge in the 1950's. Page upon page is filled
with dainty hand-sketched lattices representing carbon rings: new molecules
being
tested in
the West. They are the blueprints for plunder that the pirate has gleaned
from his
magazine
subscriptions; his budget for pharmaceutical and medical journals is $150,
000 a
year.
And just downstairs in the conference room is his treasure hoard, glittering
with
the pinks and
greens of tiny pills, the sheen of gelatin capsules, the sharp glint of
injection
ampuls. In the
room's glass cabinets are the 400 drugs made by his company, Cipla Ltd. They
include
Erecto,
the company's knockoff of Viagra; Nuzac, its knockoff of Prozac; Forcan, its
knockoff of the
antifungal drug Diflucan; Lomac, its knockoff of the ulcer drug Prilosec;
Amlopres,
its
knockoff of the hypertension drug Norvasc.
Some of these compounds make $1 billion or more a year for the Western
companies
that hold
the patents on them. But not here. They are sold by Cipla at one- twentieth
to one-
fiftieth of
the price paid in the United States.
And they are all perfectly legal, at least under Indian law.
"We did a little study," Yusuf K. Hamied, Cipla's managing director and
India's most
outspoken buccaneer, said during a tour of his headquarters. "Our turnover
is $200
million. If
we sold our products at the American-originator prices, our turnover would
be $4
billion."
To pharmaceutical giants like Pfizer, Glaxo Wellcome and Aventis, which
invest
billions of
dollars in research, Dr. Hamied embodies the enemy.
Under Indian law, only manufacturing processes, not the products themselves,
are
covered by
patents. So Indian drug companies can boldly reverse-engineer best-selling
drugs and
sell
copies cheaply. "I make every Pfizer product," Mr. Hamied boasted.
The Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, or PhRMA, which
represents
the United States industry, says Indian patent law is "designed to punish
importers
of patented
technology into India and to coerce local production."
It calls India's licensing practices "infamous" and says the experience of
some
American drug
makers "has been so negative that most companies have abandoned efforts to
obtain or
enforce
patents in India."
Exactly how much money Western pharmaceutical manufacturers lose in India
and other
countries like Brazil, Argentina, Thailand, Egypt and China that fly the
Jolly Roger
of drug
piracy is in dispute. Annual world sales of drugs amount to about $400
billion, and
some
executives claim that a tenth of that, $40 billion, is lost.
But it is also true that Western drug companies would sell very little in
the
developing world
at the prices they charge Americans and Europeans. Harvey E. Bale Jr.,
director
general of the
International Federation of Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Associations, a
Geneva-
based
industry trade group, put the total of lost sales at about $3 billion.
A PhRMA study released in February found that losses in India were $69
million a
year, but it
covered just 20 common knockoff drugs. Mr. Bale said the total loss figure
for India
was
probably $100 million a year.
Semantics and Ethics
Iain Cockburn, a professor of management at Boston University who has
studied the
issue,
says there are serious problems with pirates, because some make weak or even
toxic
counterfeits. Also, some powerful compounds, anti-AIDS drugs for example,
must be
taken on
a rigorous schedule under careful monitoring, yet knockoff drugs may be
shipped to
impoverished countries where a steady supply and satisfactory medical
supervision
cannot be
assured.
But apart from those concerns, he said, Western drug companies "just don't
like the
idea that
their proprietary rights can be got around via the back door."
"That's the bottom line," Professor Cockburn continued. "It's a threat to
the
business model."
He noted that even if "the generic companies" were selling in markets that
did not
attract the
Western drug giants, "the world supply of each molecule increases, so the
world
average price
has got to come down."
When Professor Cockburn called them "the generic companies" instead of "
pirates," he
was
underscoring an essential aspect of the knockoff drug industry. Some
producers are
fly-by-night operations making dangerous counterfeits, but others, like
Cipla and
its chief
rival, Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd., are reputable companies that make much of
their
money
manufacturing ingredients for American and European companies; 70 percent to
80
percent of
the key ingredients in American- made generic drugs come from foreign
suppliers, as
do about
60 percent of those in brand-name drugs.
It is only when the newest molecules, often made in the same factories, are
sold in
countries
where a patent has not yet expired, that a "generics manufacturer" becomes a
"pirate
counterfeiter."
"It's a marvelous piece of P.R. to get these companies called pirates," said
Frederick M.
Scherer, an emeritus professor of public policy at the Kennedy School of
Government
at
Harvard. "What they're doing is perfectly legitimate, until 2005, under the
Paris
convention
and the Uruguay Round of trade talks."
Under those talks, which set up the World Trade Organization and forged a
treaty on
intellectual property, India has until 2005 to bring its laws into
accordance with
the treaty,
which recognizes 20-year patents on most inventions. Without patents, which
ensure a
period
in which to profit by being the sole legal seller of an invention, no one
would
invest in finding
new medicines.
India's current drug laws ignore that reasoning, on the ground that saving
Indian
lives is more
important than profits to inventors. And Parliament, with the country's drug
industry lobbying
hard to protect its ability to copy molecules, is taking its time on
compliance
legislation.
"We don't need to be apologetic about it," said Dr. Javid A. Chowdhury, the
Indian
minister of
health. "We're a self-contained, developing economy. We live on little, but
we
survive.
Outside of the third world, there's very little realization of how little
money the
poor live on.
The per- capita health expenditure in India is $10 a year."
Noting that some Western drug companies have discounted their prices of AIDS
drugs
to
Africa by 80 percent, he added, "If they can offer an 80 percent discount,
there was
something
wrong with the price they started off with."
The American pharmaceutical industry — often ranked as the country's most
profitable —
disputes the view that its profits are unconscionably high. One PhRMA
statement
argues that
they are "only slightly above the average for all industries" and blames the
higher
valuations
on the way accountants write off research expenses. But it also argues that
"we need
to be
profitable in order to attract the capital to sustain innovation."
The Mechanics of Profit
Mr. Bale of the Geneva-based trade group says pharmaceutical companies
operate in a
world
in which most new drugs are either costly duds or blockbusters. To stay
competitive
— and to
stay alive in an era of mergers and increasing competition — they rely on
profits
from their
most successful products. "One or two products make or break the company,"
Mr. Bale
said.
"They drive those blockbusters to maximize revenues."
Shannon Herzfeld, a PhRMA spokeswoman, took particular issue with India's
rationale.
"We
object to their premise that intellectual property rights are a barrier to
access to
good
medicine," she said. "Anyone who says, `We have to steal' is wrong. Stealing
ideas
is not how
one provides good health care."
In fact, India recognizes Western- style intellectual property rights on
most
products, including
computer software, in which it has a thriving industry. But it does not
recognize
them on
chemicals for medicine or agriculture, a position that dates back to its
Patents Act
of 1970, for
which Mr. Hamied heavily lobbied Prime Minister Indira Gandhi. The law,
conceived in
postcolonial days when India still suffered famines and the average Indian
man could
expect
to live only about 40 years, was intended to encourage the founding of local
industries to
break the choke hold of foreign chemical companies.
At the time, India's drug prices were among the highest in the world. Now
they are
among the
lowest. Access to drugs is one reason that average life expectancy has risen
to 64
today, just as
cheap pesticides based on foreign formulas are part of the reason India now
feeds
itself.
An important provision in the 1970 law recognized "process patents" rather
than
"product
patents." That is, an inventor patents the multistep recipe for making the
drug, not
the
molecule itself. If a rival can tweak the recipe slightly but end up with
the same
molecule, he
may patent that and sell the result.
As Indian drug makers point out, many countries have used process patents to
develop
new
industries, as Japan did in the 1950's. And during the 19th-century
Industrial
Revolution,
Americans freely copied European inventions.
Asked how he feels about being called a pirate, Mr. Hamied tells an anecdote
about
an
American friend who visited India and paid for his trip by buying 1,000
Voltaren
tablets, made
by Ciba-Geigy, for his mother's arthritis. The price in America was $2,000.
In
India, because
of stiff competition from imitators, Ciba- Geigy sold the same product for 5
cents a
tablet, so
he paid $50.
"Somebody had been pirated," Mr. Hamied said. "And in this case, it wasn't
by the
Indian."
The Economics of AIDS
Jag M. Khanna, president of research for Ranbaxy, an Indian company that is
Cipla's
biggest
rival, was indignant at the suggestion that he was engaging in piracy. "I
have the
right to
follow the law of my land, and the law says I can reverse-engineer what I
like," he
said. "They
call us pirates, but we're developing our country."
Mr. Khanna's company makes generic Zantac, the Glaxo Wellcome ulcer drug, in
bulk
for $50
a kilogram. "When it was on patent," he said, "the company charged $9,000
per kilo."
Mr. Hamied makes sildenafil citrate, the active ingredient in Viagra, for 2
cents a
pill. He
exports it to Yemen and Sudan, where it sells under the Erecto name.
Assuming he
gets
government approval next month, he will sell it for 10 cents in India under
the name
Eviva or
Tarzia.
He also makes fluconazole, an antifungal drug, for an American generic drug
company
that is
testing it for sale in 2002, when Pfizer's patent on the drug, which it
sells as
Diflucan, runs out.
Meanwhile, though, Mr. Hamied is making it in bulk for $900 a pound, and
selling it
in India
for 50 cents a pill. He could make a safe, full- strength version for $135 a
pound,
and sell it for
as little as 5 cents a pill, he said. But since he exports to America, the
United
States Food and
Drug Administration imposes stringent cleanliness and safety standards on
his
factory —
small batches, constant testing, sanitized vessels, pressurized air locks,
voluminous
record-keeping — that drive costs up.
In the United States, name-brand Diflucan is sold to treat toenail fungus,
yeast
infections
including thrush, and other conditions. Pfizer makes about $1 billion a year
on it,
at a
wholesale price of about $10 a pill. At retail, it can sell for $25 or even
$40.
But a daily fluconazole tablet is also the only way to save an AIDS patient
with
cryptococcal
meningitis, a lethal brain inflammation.
In Africa, where millions have AIDS and about 10 percent develop the
meningitis,
Pfizer's
patents keep the price at about $18 a pill — a death sentence for most
infected
Africans. In
April, the company said it would eventually give the drug away free in South
Africa,
but it has
yet to do so.
Cipla makes 4 of the 14 drugs commonly used in AIDS "cocktail" therapy:
zidovudine,
lamivudine, stavudine and nevirapine. Depending on how it is formulated,
Cipla's
cocktail
costs as little as $83 a month, versus $1,000 or more in the West. But Cipla
cannot
legally sell
the drug in many African countries, which have Western-style patent laws.
The big pharmaceutical companies defend their monopolies in even the poorest
markets.
When Cipla tried to give away some Duovir, its knockoff of Glaxo Wellcome's
Combivir, in
Ghana, British-based Glaxo said it would not take action against modest
donations
but added
that it would "reserve the right to enforce our patent rights against any
further
acts of
infringement."
Dr. Hamied began reverse-engineering AIDS drugs in 1992 because, he said, he
realized the
epidemic would hit India hard. "Lamivudine took four years of my life," he
said.
Cipla keeps lowering the prices of these drugs "for social reasons," he said
, and
the company
runs television ads with public health messages.
In part, it can charge less because it keeps overhead low; its headquarters
here in
Bombay are
in a nondescript 35-year-old building behind a church and an apartment house.
Mr. Hamied said he could charge more for his drugs, but then fewer people
would be
able to
afford them. "If you want to have granite rooms and marble floors, O.K., but
it's
not my style,"
Mr. Hamied said. "I can't eat better than I do."
That said, he does have homes in London and Mauritius.
His chemists with Ph.D.'s make about $10,000 a year, a good salary in India.
The
lowest-paid
of his 3,500 employees make about $2,400 a year, he said.
Indian Success Story
Mr. Hamied comes by this mix of motivations — profit, social conscience and
nationalism —
by birthright. His father was a follower of Mahatma Gandhi's brand of Indian
nationalism
whose family chipped in to send him to study chemistry in England, India's
colonial
master, in
1924. Instead, he changed ships and went to Germany, then the world's leader
in
chemicals.
On a Berlin lake, he met a Lithuanian Jewish socialist — Mr. Hamied's
mother. They
fled as
Germany was shifting into Nazi hands, and the Chemical, Industrial and
Pharmaceutical
Laboratories, later known as Cipla, was founded in 1935.
The company still keeps a sort of shrine to the day in 1939 that Gandhi
visited,
writing in the
guest book, "I was delighted to visit this Indian enterprise."
But, like all Indian companies, Cipla suffers from what is sometimes called
"the
liability of
Indianness" — a sense in the West that its products are somehow substandard.
To be sure, India has a serious counterfeiting problem. It has more than 20,
000 drug
companies, and many make poor-quality fakes. But 70 percent of the domestic
market
is
controlled by 20 companies. Some are subsidiaries of multinationals; the
biggest,
Glaxo India,
is part of Glaxo Wellcome. The large independents, like Cipla, Ranbaxy, Dr.
Reddy's,
Wockhardt and Sun Pharma, already produce many generic drugs for export to
America,
Europe and Japan, so they pass regular inspections by visiting regulators
from the
United
States, Britain, Germany and elsewhere.
"They have a better record than some American manufacturers," said Vihari
Purushothaman,
an analyst of health care stocks for Chase JF in Bombay. They have to wait
so long
for Food
and Drug Administration inspectors to fly in, he said, "that they make sure
they
don't leave
anything to chance."
Ranbaxy has F.D.A. approval for 20 of its generic products, Mr. Khanna said,
and it
even
owns a factory in New Brunswick, N.J.
Outside the Indian city of Pune (often spelled Poona), Cipla has a brand-new
factory
where
employees in spotless scrub suits cross pressurized air locks to tend
expensive
drug- making
machinery. The factory is on a rural campus whose lawns are watered with the
purified output
of the effluent plant.
Dr. Hamied says his factories have passed 22 separate Food and Drug
Administration
inspections.
Even though multinational drug executives know there are reputable Indian
companies,
they
often tar them all by "confusing the issues by mixing `counterfeit,' `bad
quality'
and `India' in
the same heap," said Ellen 't Hoen, a drug policy consultant to Doctors
Without
Borders,
which pushes for cheaper drugs in the developing world.
Acknowledging the phenomenon, Mr. Purushothaman said there was "a sort of
racism
inherent in this."
Ms. Herzfeld, the PhRMA spokeswoman, denied that such scare tactics were
used. "I
don't
know a single executive who'd do that," she said. "That's not based on fact;
it's
sort of an urban
myth."
If India abided by Western patent laws, more Western companies would sell
there and
would
price drugs so Indian consumers could afford them, she said.
"We won't spend $500 million and 17 years to come up with a product that no
one will
buy,"
she said. "I don't see why anyone would neglect the Indian market. Our
members have
been in
Africa for decades too. We sell lots of medicine in Africa, for Parkinson's
and
heart disease,
for example. Our members are dedicated to getting our medicines to people
who are
sick."
She also suggested that the Indian government ought to look harder at its
budgets,
and
consider whether it ought to pay more for health rather than for "submarines
or
fighter planes."
Since life expectancy is part of development, she said, "maybe they might
put more
money in
health care than in 10-lane highways or in steel mills."
Indian drug executives, of course, scoff at the notion that Western
companies would
price
drugs for Indian pockets without being forced to by local competition.
Getting in Line
Whether they like it or not, however, some Indian companies are beginning to
conduct
original
research. To be accepted into the World Trade Organization, India signed the
1994
Agreement
on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights and has promised to
bring
its laws
into compliance by 2005.
Some Indians, like Amit Sen Gupta, head of the Delhi Science Forum, a
scientists'
group,
worry that product patents will turn the clock back to the 1960's, when
Western drug
companies dominated India, set high prices and conducted little research on
tropical
diseases
that, like leprosy and malaria, do not affect Americans or Europeans.
India's Parliament, however, is well behind its own 2005 legislation
schedule, and
the nation's
industry is lobbying hard to be sure the new laws do not hamstring its
ability to
copy
molecules.
The 1994 agreement recognizes that there are circumstances under which
product
patents can
be voided. These might include war, epidemics or antitrust violations by
patent
holders. One
easily exploitable provision is "failure to work the patent." Under it, a
patent can
be voided if
the patent holder fails to make or import the product, or even fails to sell
it at
prices affordable
to average citizens. Since the average Indian now spends $3.50 a year on
drugs,
affordability
could be a low threshold.
Mr. Hamied wants the new law to recognize "licensing of right," which could
allow
him to
copy any drug he wanted as long as he paid a royalty to the patent holder.
He
conceded,
though, that setting royalties would probably cause constant legal disputes.
Virtually all Indian lawmakers would agree that patents on crucial drugs
should be
voided if
people were dying for lack of them, he said. But what is a lifesaving drug?
"To an asthmatic, an inhaler is lifesaving," he said. "Everything that
improves your
quality of
life — Viagra, drugs for Alzheimer's, mood elevators, tranquilizers — can
be
lifesaving. You
must give people a chance."
C. Visalakshi, an analyst of health stocks for Kotak Securities in Bombay,
said she
doubted
any new law will go that far. She predicted that the right to copy, under
carefully
defined
circumstances, would still "definitely apply to AIDS drugs, cancer drugs and
lifesaving
drugs." She continued: "Maybe not for antibiotics. And probably not for
lifestyle
drugs like
Viagra or Rogaine."
Mr. Hamied is not waiting for a new law. Back at his desk after a tour of
his
headquarters
laboratories, which bristle with expensive equipment from Hewlett-Packard
and
Perkins-Elmer, he picks up his latest notebook.
"I think this will be a blockbuster drug," he said, displaying his sketch of
Ariflo,
an
anti-asthma drug that SmithKline Beecham has not started selling yet. "And
this." He
shows
an unreleased anti-AIDS drug called calanolide-A.
He is already breaking them down and working on new formulations. "This is
what
gives me
pleasure in life," he said with a satisfied grin. "And it's my venture
capital."
Copyright 2000 The New York Times Company
【在 s********i 的大作中提到】
: generic的药是没有专利的。药的专利只有10几年的时间，很容易就过期了。
| p******u
发帖数: 14642 | 13 啊三不是在非洲说我朝淫民山寨了药后还要山寨啊三的包装才在非洲卖得出去 |
|
