Africa is dying of Capitalism, not AIDS

A few weeks ago music artists from around the globe gathered in Cape Town, South Africa for the ‘46664’ concert. The concert was named after Nelson Mandela’s prison number. Fronted by Mandela himself, the purpose of the concert was to raise awareness for the Aids epidemic sweeping across Africa.

Recent figures have highlighted that 30 million people in Africa have been affected by HIV/AIDS, and over 17 million people have been killed by AIDS in the world’s poorest countries (more than the casualties from the wars of the last century). There are now over 11 million AIDS orphans, and this figure is estimated to rise to 20 million by the end of the decade. Such realities are stripping Africa’s population and threatening its economy, which is already crippled by poverty, debts and unfair trade policies.

The problem lies with the fact that American drugs companies have developed a treatment program for AIDS, spending enormous resources in research and development under the protection of the patent. Their reasons for doing this are simply financial; they intend to recoup their expenditure by selling the treatment at a massive profit. It costs $10,000 to undergo the treatment program as set out by American drugs companies, however, the average “yearly” wage in South Africa is just $1,000. In the absence of the patent, the treatment could cost as little as $200.

Those in favour of patent laws would argue that the massive prices reflect the enormous investment and risks taken in pharmaceutical research and development (R&D). The example given is India, where an attempt was made to do away with patent-based pharmaceutical R&D. In the absence of the patent, no company was willing to take on the massive financial risk. India eventually backtracked & fell in line with the existing model.

Western states adhere strictly to the Capitalist ideology, which caters for the material value of people, but fails to effectively take into account the moral, humanitarian and spiritual values. Consequently, institutions not based upon the material value are largely tolerated as long as they do not radically interfere with the material aspect. For example, the church is tolerated since it carries very little capability in challenging the authority, or in altering people’s materialistic mindset.

In pure Capitalist philosophy, if you have no money for food you starve, if you have no money for medicine you die, and if you have not money for cloths you go naked. Such realities are currently realised in much of the developing world, whilst in western nations there are measures to ensure people survive - in order to keep western nations strong and powerful over other nations. Even then, it is clear that many western nations are edging towards reducing public expenditure on social issues such as pensions or providing a free national health service. The ever-greater rush towards privatisation in all such areas is driven by the previously mentioned Capitalist philosophy.

Africa is dying of Capitalism, not AIDS

What a surprise capitalism and the capitalist nations who make token gestures to reduce world debt and rid the world of aids are the very reason for aids spreading and causing deaths world wide. They cannot allow even the third world countries to produce medicine that will allow people to survive this deadly disease because of the fact that the westren capitalists claim they have the patent over such medicines and the capitalists will lose $'s is that pathetic or what!

^ So in your view, pharmaceutical companies should spend hundreds of millions (or billions) of dollars researching and developing new medicines and then give it away. Maybe some of the third rate, tin-horn tyrants in various African and non-African countries could use some of the hundreds of millions (or billions) they routinely steal from their country's coffers to pay the pharmaceutical companies some money. Heck, what Saddam alone stole from the Iraqi treasury would pay for 4 million AIDS treatments at $10,000 a pop. I bet a lot of pharmaceutical companies would give a pretty hefty price discount on a $40 billion contract.

The reason AIDS is spreading and causing deaths worldwide has a lot more to do with the uneducated engaging in unprotected high risk sex than it has to do with greedy companies. A better expenditure of $10,000 might very well be distributing 10,000 condoms to Africans and teaching them how and why to use them.

If you want to find a sure fire way to keep from ever discovering treatments and remedies for a whole assortment of diseases, just take away patent protection.

Re: Africa is dying of Capitalism, not AIDS

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by ak47: *
What a surprise capitalism and the capitalist nations who make token gestures to reduce world debt and rid the world of aids are the very reason for aids spreading and causing deaths world wide. They cannot allow even the third world countries to produce medicine that will allow people to survive this deadly disease because of the fact that the westren capitalists claim they have the patent over such medicines and the capitalists will lose $'s is that pathetic or what!
[/QUOTE]

1- how is capitalism spreading AIDS?

2- had the companies that developed vaccines not poured in millions to do the research, the medicines would not be around. as much as I am against the drug companies milking the consumers..they have to be able to recoup their investment, because if they are not profitable how could they continue fundiung research for other cures and treatments

3- if capitlaim is so horrible, countries following a diff system can come up with a better alternative and can come up with their own solutions and treatments. The fact that they have not shows that this system works and thatis why this system has produced the treatments, medicines and procedures being used worldwide.

in short, I am in agreement that drug companies need to behave with more social responsibility, but if free enterprise and competition ws not there, there would be little incentives for these companies to develop medicines..i mean why proceed with projects that are not financially feasible.. one or 2 loss leaders are fine to help with some altruistic mission but not all.

If other countries have better system oh right so they have a free will to do that do they. your not that niave come on!

If you put money before peoples lives then you are a typical capitalist. what kind of person are you to put money before life!

typical capitalist measuring stick on life = $

ak47, u need money to do research, research provides treatments, treatments are sold, profits are made, they are put into research to develop new treatments.

what part of this is hard to understand.

okay then,,ignore capitalism, dont deal with capitalist countries, cuba and north korea are still around for communism. look towards them for treatments. They have a full right to develop their own solutions..howcome there are competing solutions in the same country? why can one company make one allergy medicine and the other company another one? and how does thatnot break patent rules? because they come up with different solutions...so who is stopping any other country or any other system to come up with its own solutions? as long as they are not a copy of someone else's work.

Ypu conveniently skipped over the parts where I said that predatory pricing is something I am completely opposed to and feel pharma corps can do a better job, but at the same time I am in full support of patents because they help provide the type of earnings protection for a company to be able to see the fruit of its labour, and to get the returns to further invest in research to cure other diseases or find better cures.

And its not typical capitalist mentality, its typical logic.. if companies cant make money they will not be in business or they will not have reasons to engage in research.. then not only will u not have expensive drugs.. u will not have any drugs.

so in essence you could liken this to the only fire station in the city letting the city burn down because the inhabitants cant pay the price for it.

patents are all very well but it is possible to profit at $200 considering the huge market there is..heck its probably possible to profit at much less. but the way these guys work is that they consider the price at which it will sell, not the price at which it can be bought.

Actually our fundo has hit the nail right on the head. What he is referring to is called the "essential medicines" issue at the WTO and often deals with the issue of parrallel imports. Its been an issue of discussion for nearly 3 years now. Did you know its cheaper to buy the AIDS/HIV drugs in Europe and parrellel import then to South Africa than to actually buy the products produced in South Africa by these Phrama companies. Did you know that medicines in Africa cost easily three times as much as it costs in Europe, and Europe is expensive.

I love the way both of you say that he needs to get his facts straight, when he is the only one who knows what he is talking about. I believe nearly 6 months ago (I am iffy on the time frame), the US along with the rest of the world attempted to deal with this issue. However the US was the only one that would not allow generic medicines to be sold. Brazil. The EU all agreed to it in the name of humanity. The US refused and the initiative failed. The US was ridiculed in International Trade circles beyond belief.

Pharma companies are the worst when it comes to CSR, esp with the backing of the US government they dont care about their actions in Africa. After all you dont have insitutions that can break up illegal activities like they did in the Vitamins Cartel.

I suggest both of take off your rose tinted glasses, as see this guy for not only being HT but also someone who can and in case does make a valid point. Something being discussed at the WTO for nearly 3 years now.

A very dumb title. Africa is actually dying of Aids, not capitalism, you can throw all the money in the world to buy these Aid cocktails but in the end Aids will kill these people. As myvoice said education and an increase awareness of HIV is what is needed. The fear of allowing generic manufacturers to produce these drugs is that it could lessen incentives for research and development of other drugs. A balance needs to be struck and there have been some drug companies recently that are allowing the production of generics.

^ Doesn't matter who is discussing it, the "right" answer is still the "right" answer.

If a company cannot recoup the cost of researching and developing new "essential medicines" and generate a profit enabling them to research and develop other new "essential medicines", there won't be any new "essential medicines."

Are you going to define what is and what is not an "essential medicine" only after someone invests hundreds of millions of dollars developing it? In other words, quietly let some company develop a cure/treatment for AIDS and then as soon as it is proven and brought to market you say: "OH, by the way, this is an "essential medicine" and you must give it away and lose your R&D money." After decades and decades of cancer research, are you going to make the companies that find the cure go belly up because it is determined to be "essential?"

Now, if you have every country in the world pony up to create a pool of money from which R&D for cures/treatments of certain diseases is funded, you have a whole different scenario. You've eliminated the risk of loss to the companies from failing to develop the cure/treatment or not beating their competitors to market and they would have no legitimate expectation of recouping investment or making a profit.

I expected nothing less yet again the American Secualr extremists have come up with another argument based on money and everthing is measured in terms of money including the right to live.

"Let them die because they going to eventually die soon anyway",is what they say what kind of mentality do these people have they saying this like they think they themselves are going to live forever, you all die someday you have no guarntees you will live untill next week!

If someone is sick does'nt matter if they live on your street or live on a different continent they have right to life as much as you, and if you prevent that because your Medical stock shares won't shoot up 500% how pathetic is that!

Unless they are cooking up cures in their kitchens at this very moment or working at a hospice to give comfort to those dying of AIDS, profit or no profit, the drug companies, their researchers and President Bush (11 billion was it?), have done immeasurably more for AIDS victims in Africa than any of the selfish naysayers here.

Why selfish? Because this story is just more fodder to feed the anti-U.S. agenda.

You're offended by the rampant suffering on the African continent? Get yourself down there and help or start your own non-profit medical supply company. I presume you haven't done anything, so it's a little hollow to screech about those who have.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by storch: *
Unless they are cooking up cures in their kitchens at this very moment or working at a hospice to give comfort to those dying of AIDS, profit or no profit, the drug companies, their researchers and President Bush (11 billion was it?), have done immeasurably more for AIDS victims in Africa than any of the selfish naysayers here.

Why selfish? Because this story is just more fodder to feed the anti-U.S. agenda.

You're offended by the rampant suffering on the African continent? Get yourself down there and help or start your own non-profit medical supply company. I presume you haven't done anything, so it's a little hollow to screech about those who have.
[/QUOTE]

You're right storch. Somehow or other there is just too much attitude in certain people that they should be allowed to be freeloaders all their lives and that they should be given everything they want or need. Why work and earn money to buy food? Just give it to me. Don't have a place to live? Just demand that someone else give it to you.

It seems like such simple logic that if a chicken is your sole source of food, you feed it and eat the eggs it lays for years. You don't kill it so you can have one last meal.

^
I'm not opposed at all to financial help for impoverished victims, and as Fraudia stated, the margins at work in the Pharma industry may be abhorent in many cases.

I merely take exception, to people who likely have done nothing financially or otherwise to alleviate this crisis in Africa. Profits or no, the U.S. and Pharma giants and researchers have advanced the treatment of this disease which has led to decreased suffering and longer life for victims. I think a non-profit research institute to develop drugs and therapies for all sorts of disease funded like any charity is a wonderful idea. To be successful, it would most likely be funded by "Capitalism-generated" monies. So get on it fellas. There is a world of suffering out there...and they're just waiting for productive motivated souls like yourselves.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by storch: *
I merely take exception, to people who likely have done nothing financially or otherwise to alleviate this crisis in Africa. Profits or no, the U.S. and Pharma giants and researchers have advanced the treatment of this disease which has led to decreased suffering and longer life for victims. I think a non-profit research institute to develop drugs and therapies for all sorts of disease funded like any charity is a wonderful idea. To be successful, it would most likely be funded by "Capitalism-generated" monies. So get on it fellas. There is a world of suffering out there...and they're just waiting for productive motivated souls like yourselves.
[/QUOTE]

Can't agree more with you and "myvoice".

Up to now Africa has been a big black hole slurping up all funds/aid with no real improvement. The leaders are mostly out to enrich themselves. Mbeki's NEPAD is dead-born as he and his cronies do not want to force down good government. Unfortunately Africa has become a beggar (always quoting that the West MUST give aid due to past wrongs committed) who does not want to help himself.

It is time for the spineless leaders of Africa to stand up, insist from fellow leaders to commit themselve to good government with the thread to ignore those that do not toe the line. Untill this happens, one can but pray for the poor people in Africa....

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by storch: *
^
I'm not opposed at all to financial help for impoverished victims, and as Fraudia stated, the margins at work in the Pharma industry may be abhorent in many cases.

[/QUOTE]

Nor am I opposed to that either and I think we Americans do a pretty good job responding during international humanitarian crises. Yes, there are players in the Pharma industry who operate outside what many of us view as unconscionable. But the answer to that is not to unconscioanbly take from them everything they have developed at less than a fair value. I read a story recently about Mail Order pharmacies in Canada that are doing a huge business with Americans by selling cheaper drugs than are available in the US. Rather than protect American drug companies, we ought to force them to compete and offer price competitive drugs.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by storch: *
I think a non-profit research institute to develop drugs and therapies for all sorts of disease funded like any charity is a wonderful idea. To be successful, it would most likely be funded by "Capitalism-generated" monies.

[/QUOTE]

This fits in with what I wrote earlier. But, instead of non-profits funded by private sources, why not have all countries fund an international monetary pool for diseases that pose an international humanitarian crisis. Existing Pharmaceutical companies could bid for R&D projects. Since they are not at financial risk of loss from failure to utlimately develop and market a product, this ought to make the profit margins leaner. I don't know the actual figures, but I'd guess 7, 8 or 9 out of 10 R&D efforts end in failure to develop a product for market. As it is, the margins on the 1, 2 or 3 that make it to market need to cover the money invested in the failures too.

Originally posted by CM: *
**Actually our fundo has hit the nail right on the head. What he is referring to is called the "essential medicines" issue at the WTO and often deals with the issue of parrallel imports. Its been an issue of discussion for nearly 3 years now. Did you know its cheaper to buy the AIDS/HIV drugs in Europe and parrellel import then to South Africa than to actually buy the products produced in South Africa by these Phrama companies. Did you know that medicines in Africa cost easily three times as much as it costs in Europe, and Europe is expensive.
*

okay so the import of drugs from europe is an avenue. Just like some ppl in US are importing drugs from canada because its cheaper to do that rather then getting them in US.

and yes, i know the issue at WTO.

I love the way both of you say that he needs to get his facts straight, when he is the only one who knows what he is talking about. I believe nearly 6 months ago (I am iffy on the time frame), the US along with the rest of the world attempted to deal with this issue. However the US was the only one that would not allow generic medicines to be sold. Brazil. The EU all agreed to it in the name of humanity. The US refused and the initiative failed. The US was ridiculed in International Trade circles beyond belief.

and from an economics persepctive how many patents was brazil, burkina faso and solomon islands going to lose vs US?

if other countries agreed, was US point of view voted down? I mean more power to European countries and Brazil to allow generic medicine for medicines which they hold teh patents to. what happened there. Did they too back off because US did nto agree to it or what. I am trying o understand the situation here.

and those who ridiculed US, did they go ahead and go on serving some humanitarian needs?.. or were they mere lip service and did not do jack by themselves

*I suggest both of take off your rose tinted glasses, as see this guy for not only being HT but also someone who can and in case does make a valid point. Something being discussed at the WTO for nearly 3 years now. *

please stop dragging HT into it. You may be unable to seperate the individual from some group, even if he was a member of columbian clowns circus and not HT my response would be the same.

This is a real issue and the fact that its being discussed in the WTO, like manyother trade issues..is not some news. However when we go on with saying that ppl are dying due to capitalism..lets complete the sentence and say that the only hope they had i.e. drugs are there due to capitalism as well. lets look at that as well.

You conveniently forgot to read the part of my post which said that I am opposed to predatory pricing of drugs, but for patents. You can have patents enforcements and still have cheraper drugs if the pricing is brought into question. They are different issues. storch got it...here are his words

I'm not opposed at all to financial help for impoverished victims, and as Fraudia stated, the margins at work in the Pharma industry may be abhorent in many cases.

Old man has a better view of the big picture as he is south african, thanks for posting your perspective old man.

Now as far as just the idea that africa is dying of capitalism and not aids..I dont know of any drug that reverses Aids, or cures it..it may stop or delay HIV into blowing up into full fledged aids, but it does nto cure aids.

here is a much simpler solution, give ppl condoms..dont allow women who are HIV positive to have babies.

If africa did a better job of controling the spread of the disease, it would not be in the state that it is in.

Now dont get me wrong..let me make it easier

1) I can not stand the predatory pricing of drug companies. as i stated US consumers pay more for drugs than drugs by the same companies overseas.
2) patents should be protected, but pressure should be applied by govts so drug companies lower prices.
3) free market and competition helped create these treatments, and many others that are keeping people alive worldwide.

Myvoice, your government has described AIDS medicine as "essential". This is a north south issue, with the US agreeing with the definition. Essential medicines according to the failed draft paper included, AIDS, Hepatitsis and Malaria, and a couple of others i cant remember off of the top of my head. The EU has already agreed with the definition and moved to implement it independently. Thats what you can humanity. Not capitalist dogma that lets innocent suffer and die.

Honestly this isnt an issue of economics or politics. Its one of CSR. The WTO had the chance of making it an international issues. The US blocked it. Fraudia if you know of the issue at the WTO, you should also know that the WTO is based on a concensus vote. Thus if the one member be it burundi or Jordan say no. The initiative fails. In this case the US said no due to its Pharma companies, while roughly 130 nations said yes.

The US would lose more patents. But honestly patents are not at all developing country friendly. The most important world inventions were not patented. Heck Microsoft was freeware while Clarisworks etc were not. Where is Microsoft now? Just take a look at Linux and its future, with pulling in 200,000 new users a year. Open source is the future. It is the way. The IT sector is a perfect example where the lack of patents have fuelled the growth of society and technology. I am honestly sick and tired of hearing about patent and copywrite support.

Capitalism didnt create the www. capitalism didnt create electricity. capitalism didnt create pencillin. Shall i go on?

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by storch: *
Unless they are cooking up cures in their kitchens at this very moment or working at a hospice to give comfort to those dying of AIDS, profit or no profit, the drug companies, their researchers and President Bush (11 billion was it?), have done immeasurably more for AIDS victims in Africa than any of the selfish naysayers here.

Why selfish? Because this story is just more fodder to feed the anti-U.S. agenda.

You're offended by the rampant suffering on the African continent? Get yourself down there and help or start your own non-profit medical supply company. I presume you haven't done anything, so it's a little hollow to screech about those who have.
[/QUOTE]

Storch

Anti us agenda well theres no smoke without fire if culprit commits a crime they have to be named and shamed.

As for Bush 11 billion Aids pledge talk is cheap, the USA took how many years to pay a 1billion debt to the UN they still havent paid that off. But they have no problem spending 90 billion destroying iraq or spending 400 billion on weaponry!

secondly if they fighting tooth and nail to prevent cheap Aids medicines beign produced in the third world for the sake of profits and profits alone i don't see in relaity how they will invest 11 billion on Aids.

finally your claim of bush and drugs companies doing more for aids then anyone you are right they are doing everythin they can to earn a dollar at the cost of peoples lives!

Originally posted by CM: *
The WTO had the chance of making it an international issues. The US blocked it. Fraudia if you know of the issue at the WTO, you should also know that the WTO is based on a concensus vote. Thus if the one member be it burundi or Jordan say no. The initiative fails. In this case the US said no due to its Pharma companies, while roughly 130 nations said yes. *

does it block individual countirs from doing what they think is right? So due to consensus it did not become an international issue. what is preventing other countries from doing domestically what they think is right.

*The US would lose more patents. But honestly patents are not at all developing country friendly. *

Patents are not developed country friendly either in the sense that you are talkign about, but in a bigger picture with protection of intellectual rights in general they help convince companies that if they invest they will be able to recoup their investment.

*The most important world inventions were not patented. Heck Microsoft was freeware while Clarisworks etc were not. Where is Microsoft now? *

does microsoft have trademarks and copyrigth laws now? and has it had them for years?

sheesh the damn wheel was not patented either, but lets talk last 2 decades :)

Just take a look at Linux and its future, with pulling in 200,000 new users a year. Open source is the future. It is the way.

The IT sector is a perfect example where the lack of patents have fuelled the growth of society and technology. I am honestly sick and tired of hearing about patent and copywrite support.

do talk to people at SAP, Oracle, Siebel, PeopleSoft, JDE, about open source.

*Capitalism didnt create the www. capitalism didnt create electricity. capitalism didnt create pencillin. Shall i go on? *

Please go on, and at the same time note how many new products were created in countries with a free market system vs those that did not have it. Trabants are not good examples.