<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: WHO, Gates, Industry And NGO Leaders Elevate Attention To Neglected Diseases</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.ip-watch.org/2012/01/30/who-gates-industry-and-ngo-leaders-elevate-attention-to-neglected-diseases/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.ip-watch.org/2012/01/30/who-gates-industry-and-ngo-leaders-elevate-attention-to-neglected-diseases/</link>
	<description>Original news and analysis on international IP policy</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 22 May 2013 20:41:18 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Riaz K Tayob</title>
		<link>http://www.ip-watch.org/2012/01/30/who-gates-industry-and-ngo-leaders-elevate-attention-to-neglected-diseases/comment-page-1/#comment-4914365</link>
		<dc:creator>Riaz K Tayob</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Jan 2012 20:27:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ip-watch.org/?p=19254#comment-4914365</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Another laudable initiative from WHO, but will it deliver? WHO has played a rather churlish game when it comes to the 10/90 gap - that serious misallocation of health R&amp;D - but will not challenge the market based intellectual property rights system. The market system is always correct! Even the Global Strategy and Plan of Action was negotiated while WHO officials sought to marginalise the importance of the process by even limiting the scope of diseases that it was supposed to cover at its own initiate! Why is it groups like DNDi are more effective than WHOs TDR (which has done good work, but why not more)? Is this not an indictment on collective action? While the Global Strategy talks were underway, WHO was pushing another initiative (Bamako) instead of consolidating its programmes, it seems like fragmentation on issues that are sensitive to IPR rights holders ok, but in all others please &#039;Deliver as One&#039; (the UN reform mantra). And why were WHO officials content to let the discussions on the Global Strategy be held behind closed doors like they do at the WTO? Is WHO really commited to transparency ? It will be interesting to see the transparency of these initiatives...]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Another laudable initiative from WHO, but will it deliver? WHO has played a rather churlish game when it comes to the 10/90 gap &#8211; that serious misallocation of health R&amp;D &#8211; but will not challenge the market based intellectual property rights system. The market system is always correct! Even the Global Strategy and Plan of Action was negotiated while WHO officials sought to marginalise the importance of the process by even limiting the scope of diseases that it was supposed to cover at its own initiate! Why is it groups like DNDi are more effective than WHOs TDR (which has done good work, but why not more)? Is this not an indictment on collective action? While the Global Strategy talks were underway, WHO was pushing another initiative (Bamako) instead of consolidating its programmes, it seems like fragmentation on issues that are sensitive to IPR rights holders ok, but in all others please &#8216;Deliver as One&#8217; (the UN reform mantra). And why were WHO officials content to let the discussions on the Global Strategy be held behind closed doors like they do at the WTO? Is WHO really commited to transparency ? It will be interesting to see the transparency of these initiatives&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Page Caching using disk: enhanced

 Served from: www.ip-watch.org @ 2013-05-23 13:05:40 by W3 Total Cache -->