SUBSCRIBE TODAY!
Subscribing entitles a reader to complete stories on all topics released as they happen, special features, confidential documents and access to the complete, searchable story archive online back to 2004.

Advertisement


Inside Views

Submit ideas to info [at] ip-watch [dot] ch!

We welcome your participation in article and blog comment threads, and other discussion forums, where we encourage you to analyse and react to the content available on the Intellectual Property Watch website.

By participating in discussions or reader forums, or by submitting opinion pieces or comments to articles, blogs, reviews or multimedia features, you are consenting to these rules.

1. You agree that you are fully responsible for the content that you post. You will not knowingly post content that violates the copyright, trademark, patent or other intellectual property right of any third party or which you know is under a confidentiality obligation preventing its publication and that you will request removal of the same should you discover that you have violated this provision. Likewise, you may not post content that is libelous, defamatory, obscene, abusive, that violates a third party's right to privacy, that otherwise violates any applicable local, state, national or international law, that amounts to spamming or that is otherwise inappropriate. You may not post content that degrades others on the basis of gender, race, class, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual preference, disability or other classification. Epithets and other language intended to intimidate or to incite violence are also prohibited. Furthermore, you may not impersonate others.

2. You understand and agree that Intellectual Property Watch is not responsible for any content posted by you or third parties. You further understand that IP Watch does not monitor the content posted. Nevertheless, IP Watch may monitor the any user-generated content as it chooses and reserves the right to remove, edit or otherwise alter content that it deems inappropriate for any reason whatever without consent nor notice. We further reserve the right, in our sole discretion, to remove a user's privilege to post content on our site. IP Watch is not in any manner endorsing the content of the discussion forums and cannot and will not vouch for its reliability or otherwise accept liability for it.

3. By submitting any contribution to IP Watch, you warrant that your contribution is your own original work and that you have the right to make it available to IP Watch for all purposes and you agree to indemnify IP Watch, its directors, employees and agents against all damages, legal fees and others expenses that may be incurred by IP Watch as a result of your breach of warranty or of these terms.

4. You further agree not to publish any personal information about yourself or anyone else (for example telephone number or home address). If you add a comment to a blog, be aware that your email address will be apparent.

5. IP Watch will not be liable for any loss including but not limited to the following (whether such losses are foreseen, known or otherwise): loss of data, loss of revenue or anticipated profit, loss of business, loss of opportunity, loss of goodwill or injury to reputation, losses suffered by third parties, any indirect, consequential or exemplary damages.

6. You understand and agree that the discussion forums are to be used only for non-commercial purposes. You may not solicit funds, promote commercial entities or otherwise engage in commercial activity in our discussion forums.

7. You acknowledge and agree that you use and/or rely on any information obtained through the discussion forums at your own risk.

8. For any content that you post, you hereby grant to IP Watch the royalty-free, irrevocable, perpetual, exclusive and fully sub-licensable license to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform and display such content in whole or in part, world-wide and to incorporate it in other works, in any form, media or technology now known or later developed.

9. These terms and your posts and contributions shall be governed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of Switzerland (without giving effect to conflict of laws principles thereof) and any dispute exclusively settled by the Courts of the Canton of Geneva.

WHO Should Have The Evidence? Ben Goldacre Refutes WHO Director’s Claim

“Bad Science” adversary and journalist, Dr Ben Goldacre, this week challenged WHO Director of Ethics and Social Determinants of Health, Dr Rüdiger Krech, on his understanding of published evidence.





Latest Comments
  • As it happens, I own and create "intellectual prop... »
  • So long term planning of the UN Development Decade... »

  • For IPW Subscribers
    A directory of IP delegates in Geneva. Read more>

    A guide to Geneva-based public health and intellectual property organisations. Read More >

    Monthly Reporter

    The Intellectual Property Watch Monthly Reporter, published from 2004 to January 2011, is a 16-page monthly selection of the most important, updated stories and features, plus the People and News Briefs columns.

    The Intellectual Property Watch Monthly Reporter is available in an online archive on the IP-Watch website, available for IP-Watch Subscribers.

    Access the Monthly Reporter Archive >


    WHO Board Considers Reform, Director Re-Election, Key IP-Related Issues

    Published on 16 January 2012 @ 7:06 pm

    By , Intellectual Property Watch

    The UN World Health Organization Executive Board opened its annual January meeting today with a substantive agenda of reform, election, and a variety of issues that touch on intellectual property rights, research and development and innovation. And with the organization in reform and funding straits in a rapidly changing world, the director general stressed the agency’s steadfast approach and role in addressing the increasing global inequality between rich and poor.

    In her prepared opening remarks today, WHO Director General Margaret Chan mentioned most of the key issues before the Executive Board, which is meeting from 16-23 January. This includes organisational reform, financing of R&D for neglected diseases, a framework for pandemic influenza preparedness, noncommunicable diseases, and even intellectual property rights.

    Documents for the Executive Board meeting are here.

    On IP rights, she used it as one of her examples of how WHO has shown “consistent ability to reach agreement on global governance instruments that provide collective protection against shared threats.”

    “Like the need to manage intellectual property rights in fair ways, for industry, but most especially for public health,” she said in her prepared remarks.

    Chan did not directly mention the issue of counterfeit and substandard medical products by name, perhaps because of the difficulty in finding acceptable words by which to refer to it. The issue of “substandard/spurious/falsely-labelled/falsified/counterfeit medical products” – as it has been dubbed by member states in an effort to appease all sides – has been controversial at WHO in recent years. But members managed to agree in October on a new mechanism for addressing the issue (IPW, WHO, 1 November 2011).

    This week, the board will consider the report of the October meeting and the last World Health Assembly held in May 2011.

    She also mentioned as an example of agreement, “influenza pandemics and the need to be prepared, with equitable distribution of benefits.” Despite controversy and suspicion, a new (and rather secretive) pandemic advisory group has been set up and began work in November (IPW, WHO, 22 November 2011).

    “The negotiations that culminated in the framework for pandemic influenza preparedness were the most difficult and potentially explosive that I have ever witnessed in my 35 years in public health,” Chan said. “But the spirit of consensus and fair play eventually won, and we got a square deal for everyone, including the pharmaceutical industry.” Chan repeated several times that negotiations in the WHO lead to a “square deal” for all.

    Such outcomes signal that “countries really want risks to be proactively managed,” she said. “They want rules of proper conduct, with clearly assigned responsibilities, and they want fairness, a fair deal for everyone.”

    The action this week is for Chan to present a report on the work of the pandemic advisory group.

    Meanwhile, the proposed negotiation of a treaty on financing and coordination of R&D for neglected diseases and other medical products may test the WHO’s ability to provide a forum for member states to reach agreement on sticky issues. A consultative WHO expert group in November agreed to recommend the negotiation of a binding treaty (IPW, WHO, 14 December 2011).

    Chan referred to “how commitment to a limited number of time-bound goals has improved health outcomes in measurable and often significant ways.” She said: “We also see how this commitment has left a powerful legacy of innovations. Like financing instruments, like ways of securing money from new sources. Like a new breed of strategic R&D partnerships that are bringing to market innovative products tailor-made to tackle diseases of the poor.”

    The board will consider a summary of meetings to date and the group’s call for proposals.

    A key item on the agenda for the board is a “deepening” of the extensive reform effort at the 60-year-old organisation, following the approval of a reform plan in a special session of the board in November (IPW, WHO, 4 November 2011). The reform targets WHO programme and priority setting, governance and management. It looks to broaden WHO’s engagement with other actors (such as foundations and non-governmental organisations), create contingency funding, clarify roles at the various levels of offices in WHO, and establish independent evaluation.

    On reform, the board this week will provide direction on the aspects of WHO reform to be considered at the Assembly in May, according to a WHO press officer.

    If there is a competitive advantage emerging at the WHO, it appears to be the notion of the square deal. “WHO and its member states have long been concerned about equity, fairness, and social justice, and the interplay between social conditions and health outcomes,” Chan said, indicating that this makes it more important in a time of greatly widening inequalities globally. She cited a report from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD).

    The board also will consider the re-election for five years of Chan, who is running unopposed, for the term 1 July 2012 to 30 June 2017. She has been DG since 2007, has geographic affiliation with Hong Kong and Canada (her CV, here, states she is Chinese), and has overseen a tumultuous time of positioning the WHO in an increasingly crowded field of foundations like Gates, the Global Fund to fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, and the Global Alliance for Vaccines Initiative, that have closer ties to developed country private-sector funding. Chan has weathered concerns about undue industry influence, overblown reaction to pandemic flu, and an over-centralised management style within the organisation.

    Chan’s annual salary will be US $251,188 before staff assessment (resulting in a considerably lower net salary). She also receives a US $20,000 “representation allowance”, which sources say is typically used to ensure the director of an international organisation dresses well and the like.

    Among other issues on the agenda is to follow up on the UN High-Level Meeting of the General Assembly on the Prevention and Control of Noncommunicable Diseases and the First Global Ministerial Conference on Healthy Lifestyles and Noncommunicable Disease Control. This includes implementation of the global strategy for the prevention and control of NCDs and the action plan (IPW, WHO, 16 September 2011).

    Additional issues include: progress on Millennium Development Goals, an update on a draft global vaccine action plan, and issues of food safety, as well as of climate change and public health.

    In her remarks, Chan said WHO has “stayed the course, steadfast and surefooted.” In the past, the path forward may have been clearer. Whether WHO will continue to keep its footing, as it faces greater global and internal risks and problems than ever before, remains to be seen.

    William New may be reached at wnew@ip-watch.ch.

     


    Leave a Reply

    We welcome your participation in article and blog comment threads, and other discussion forums, where we encourage you to analyse and react to the content available on the Intellectual Property Watch website. By participating in discussions or reader forums, or by submitting opinion pieces or comments to articles, blogs, reviews or multimedia features, you are consenting to these rules.

    We welcome your participation in article and blog comment threads, and other discussion forums, where we encourage you to analyse and react to the content available on the Intellectual Property Watch website.

    By participating in discussions or reader forums, or by submitting opinion pieces or comments to articles, blogs, reviews or multimedia features, you are consenting to these rules.

    1. You agree that you are fully responsible for the content that you post. You will not knowingly post content that violates the copyright, trademark, patent or other intellectual property right of any third party or which you know is under a confidentiality obligation preventing its publication and that you will request removal of the same should you discover that you have violated this provision. Likewise, you may not post content that is libelous, defamatory, obscene, abusive, that violates a third party's right to privacy, that otherwise violates any applicable local, state, national or international law, that amounts to spamming or that is otherwise inappropriate. You may not post content that degrades others on the basis of gender, race, class, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual preference, disability or other classification. Epithets and other language intended to intimidate or to incite violence are also prohibited. Furthermore, you may not impersonate others.

    2. You understand and agree that Intellectual Property Watch is not responsible for any content posted by you or third parties. You further understand that IP Watch does not monitor the content posted. Nevertheless, IP Watch may monitor the any user-generated content as it chooses and reserves the right to remove, edit or otherwise alter content that it deems inappropriate for any reason whatever without consent nor notice. We further reserve the right, in our sole discretion, to remove a user's privilege to post content on our site. IP Watch is not in any manner endorsing the content of the discussion forums and cannot and will not vouch for its reliability or otherwise accept liability for it.

    3. By submitting any contribution to IP Watch, you warrant that your contribution is your own original work and that you have the right to make it available to IP Watch for all purposes and you agree to indemnify IP Watch, its directors, employees and agents against all damages, legal fees and others expenses that may be incurred by IP Watch as a result of your breach of warranty or of these terms.

    4. You further agree not to publish any personal information about yourself or anyone else (for example telephone number or home address). If you add a comment to a blog, be aware that your email address will be apparent.

    5. IP Watch will not be liable for any loss including but not limited to the following (whether such losses are foreseen, known or otherwise): loss of data, loss of revenue or anticipated profit, loss of business, loss of opportunity, loss of goodwill or injury to reputation, losses suffered by third parties, any indirect, consequential or exemplary damages.

    6. You understand and agree that the discussion forums are to be used only for non-commercial purposes. You may not solicit funds, promote commercial entities or otherwise engage in commercial activity in our discussion forums.

    7. You acknowledge and agree that you use and/or rely on any information obtained through the discussion forums at your own risk.

    8. For any content that you post, you hereby grant to IP Watch the royalty-free, irrevocable, perpetual, exclusive and fully sub-licensable license to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform and display such content in whole or in part, world-wide and to incorporate it in other works, in any form, media or technology now known or later developed.

    9. These terms and your posts and contributions shall be governed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of Switzerland (without giving effect to conflict of laws principles thereof) and any dispute exclusively settled by the Courts of the Canton of Geneva.

     

     
    Your IP address is 107.22.156.205