The Asociación de Industrias Farmaceuticas Dominicanas, Inc. says that behind the movement to get the President to veto the recently passed Intellectual Property Bill is that the pharmaceutical multinationals oppose competition from national manufacturers in their attempt to preserve their high profits. All the fuss is merely business lobbying by pharmaceutical companies attempting to keep control of market where local companies have increased their market share to 51%, say the local manufacturers in an advertisement in the press today. Their position is that the pharmaceuticals want to keep their privileges in an irregular manner. The Association publishes today a list of comparative prices showing the excessive pricing of the pharmaceutical multinational products in the DR. Following is a listing of the drug and the cost of the multinational brand and its local equivalent. Prices are in RD pesos. To get the dollar equivalency, divide by 16. Enalapril – $581/$149 Simvastatina-$677/$312 Amlodipina-$704/$1674 Piroxicam-$1,560-$357 Fluoxetina-$659.75-$183.55 Nistatina-$225/$76 Omeprazol-$767-$325 Ranitidina-$280-$104 Piracetam-$360/$234 Lovastatina-$859-$286 The excessive profit of US pharmaceuticals is a controversial matter in the US, too. Brian Schweitzer who is running for the Montana Democratic nomination to challenge Sen. Conrad Burns (R-Mont.), maintains a crusade against the high cost of prescription drugs in the United States versus pricing of the same drugs in Canada and Mexico. (http://www.brianschweitzer.com/crusade.html) Expert says new bill is compliant with WTO rules While the American and European chambers of commerce wave the threat that the US government could remove trade privileges (such as CBI and GSP), economist Jaime Aristy writes in the Listin Diario newspaper that this would not stand in today’s trade world that is ruled by the World Trade Organization. To contest the content of the Intellectual Property Bill passed by the Congress, a claim would have to be placed before the WTO organization created for this purpose, the Dispute-Settlement Body (DSB), says the reputed economist and intellectual property expert. Aristy says that the new bill fills WTO stipulations. He said that the Dominican legislators included elements that ensure the transfer of technology and promotion of internal competition that is necessary to raise the welfare of the Dominican people. Aristy was critical that a group of Dominican businessmen were letting themselves be used to spread the news of a possible threat of removing preferential trade privileges seeking to convince President Fernández to not sign the bill into law. (See http://www.dr1.com/daily/news050200.shtml) Aristy comments that the president of the influential National Council of Business, Celso Marranzini who initially supported the bill as passed by Congress, abruptly did an about-face in his position. He quotes Marranzini saying early on: "It is understandable that the US is interested in bills that are made as they want, but this is not a matter of making a custom-made suit, bills should be made in accordance to the reality of each country." Marranzini emphasized that countries need to legislate on bills that are convenient to the interests of the majority. Aristy said that the bill was made consulting with international trade experts, such as Carlos Correa and Luis Abugattas.
