This piece by the Associated Press is an update of the unfolding story concerning the influence of pharmaceutical companies on World Health Organisation decisions concerning the swine flu. We are several months away from an expert panel report but in the interim speculation runs high and conspiracy theories abound. Whichever way things turn out in [...]
This piece by the Associated Press is an update of the unfolding story concerning the influence of pharmaceutical companies on World Health Organisation decisions concerning the swine flu. We are several months away from an expert panel report but in the interim speculation runs high and conspiracy theories abound. Whichever way things turn out in the future, it is quite certain that both public and private sector institutional buyers of vaccines will think twice before investing significant sums in stockpiling flu vaccines. While stockpiling can be a form of insurance for a likely future pandemics, it can also be a terribly expensive and futile exercise if pandemic guidelines are biased and lack transparency.
Best regards, Joao
*****
GENEVA — The head of the World Health Organization on Tuesday strongly rejected suggestions that her decisions about swine flu were influenced by advisers’ links to pharmaceutical companies. “At no time, not for one second, did commercial interests enter my decision-making,” WHO Director-General Margaret Chan said. She also dismissed claims the global health body had stirred unnecessary public fear over the pandemic. Her statement came in response to an article in the British Medical Journal that questioned the way WHO managed conflicts of interest among its scientific advisers and the transparency of its advice to governments. WHO’s handling of the outbreak is being reviewed by a 29-member expert panel that will report its findings next year. Critics say many of the panelists are also trusted WHO advisers and government employees who could end up whitewashing any failures.
Source: Associated Press
Type 1 diabetes is caused when certain white blood cells, called T cells, go haywire and begin attacking insulin-producing cells in the pancreas. But not all T cells cause harm, said Dr. Pere Santamaria of the University of Calgary in Alberta, whose study appears in the journal Immunity. “Essentially, there is an internal tug-of-war between [...]
Type 1 diabetes is caused when certain white blood cells, called T cells, go haywire and begin attacking insulin-producing cells in the pancreas. But not all T cells cause harm, said Dr. Pere Santamaria of the University of Calgary in Alberta, whose study appears in the journal Immunity. “Essentially, there is an internal tug-of-war between aggressive T cells that want to cause the disease and weaker T cells that want to stop it from occurring,” Santamaria said in a statement. Santamaria’s team wanted to find a way to counteract the harmful autoimmune response without compromising general immunity. They developed a so-called nanovaccine — particles many times smaller than a cell and coated with protein fragments specific to type 1 diabetes. These were bound to molecules that play a critical role in presenting these protein fragments to T cells. When the team gave the vaccine to mice with an early form of type 1 diabetes, they found the vaccine slowed the progression of the disease. And in mice that had full-blown diabetes, the vaccine helped restore normal blood sugar levels.
Source: Reuters
Keiji Fukuda, the WHO’s top influenza expert, said the U.N. agency’s six-phase system for declaring a pandemic had sown confusion about the flu bug which was ultimately not as deadly as the widely-feared avian influenza. “The reality is there is a huge amount of uncertainty (in a pandemic). I think we did not convey the [...]
Keiji Fukuda, the WHO’s top influenza expert, said the U.N. agency’s six-phase system for declaring a pandemic had sown confusion about the flu bug which was ultimately not as deadly as the widely-feared avian influenza. “The reality is there is a huge amount of uncertainty (in a pandemic). I think we did not convey the uncertainty. That was interpreted by many as a non-transparent process,” Fukuda said. He was addressing a three-day meeting of 29 external flu experts called to review WHO’s handling of the first influenza pandemic in 40 years.
LINKS TO DRUG COMPANIES
Critics have said the WHO created panic about the swine flu virus, which turned out to be moderate in its effect, and caused governments to stockpile vaccines which went unused. Some questioned its links to the pharmaceutical industry after companies like GlaxoSmithKline and Sanofi-Aventis profited from producing H1N1 vaccine. Kenya’s delegation criticized the United Nations agency for failing to ensure that developing countries received a fair share of vaccines developed against the virus. “It is not fair to have new vaccines and medicines and then they are so expensive that most poor people in developing countries can’t access them,” Kenya’s delegate said. “This is not a situation that should be tolerated at all.” To date, 31 poorer countries including Afghanistan, Cuba, Kenya and Myanmar have received limited supplies of vaccine donated by drug companies and Western countries, via the WHO. India’s delegation suggested that in public health emergencies, patents on vital drugs should be lifted in line with the World Trade Organization’s TRIPS agreement on intellectual property. H1N1, which emerged in Mexico and the United States almost exactly a year ago, has killed 17,770 people in 213 countries, according to WHO, which declared a pandemic under way in June. The WHO will need another year or two after the pandemic is declared over to determine a final death rate from the virus, which is certain to be much higher. The pandemic is still officially under way.
Source: Reuters
Several drug firms have agreed a landmark deal to supply up to 200 million doses a year of cut-price pneumococcal vaccines to developing nations, according to the global immunisation alliance that is overseeing the deal.
Leading manufacturers of such vaccines include GlaxoSmithKline and Pfizer.
The agreement is the first under a new scheme called an [...]
Several drug firms have agreed a landmark deal to supply up to 200 million doses a year of cut-price pneumococcal vaccines to developing nations, according to the global immunisation alliance that is overseeing the deal.
Leading manufacturers of such vaccines include GlaxoSmithKline and Pfizer.
The agreement is the first under a new scheme called an Advance Market Commitment (AMC), which provides a guaranteed market for vaccines supplied to poor nations but sets a maximum price that drugmakers can expect to receive.
It is likely to pave the way for future deals on recently introduced vaccines against rotavirus, which causes severe diarrhoea, and an experimental one against malaria, which combined kill millions in poor countries each year.
The GAVI Alliance (Global Alliance on Vaccines and Immunisation) said details of the pneumococcal deal would be announced in the coming weeks.
“Decisions have been made and we are hoping for an announcement very shortly — in the next couple of weeks,” GAVI’s deputy chief executive officer Helen Evans told Reuters in an interview on Thursday.
“It’s very exciting news because they are going to make long-term commitments.”
Pneumococcal disease is one of the world’s biggest killers of children, claiming up to 1.6 million lives each year. Africa and Asia together account for 95% of all deaths from pneumococcal disease, which causes serious illnesses such as pneumonia and meningitis.
Glaxo’s pneumococcal vaccine, called Synflorix, protects against 10 strains of the streptococcus pneumoniae bacteria which cause the disease. It was approved late last year by the World Health Organisation for use in developing countries.
Pfizer’s Prevnar 13 shot protects against 13 strains and won the approval of US regulators earlier this month.
Source: News Center
The Lancet, Volume 375, Issue 9717, Page 791, 6 March 2010
As governments pull back on aid commitments, the GAVI Alliance is facing a funding shortfall for the next decade that could hamper the roll-out of new vaccines. Ann Danaiya Usher reports.
The GAVI Alliance, which celebrated its tenth anniversary in January, plans a [...]
The Lancet, Volume 375, Issue 9717, Page 791, 6 March 2010
As governments pull back on aid commitments, the GAVI Alliance is facing a funding shortfall for the next decade that could hamper the roll-out of new vaccines. Ann Danaiya Usher reports.
The GAVI Alliance, which celebrated its tenth anniversary in January, plans a huge expansion of its programmes amid financial uncertainty among government donors.
To pay for new activities during the next 5 years, GAVI will have to raise up to US$4 billion—an amount equivalent to its total spending during the past decade.
During its first decade, GAVI enjoyed steadily increasing financing from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, bilateral donors, and the International Finance Facility for Immunisation. The latest data from GAVI show that during 1999–2009, it received $3·8 billion (table). Additionally, up to 2015, GAVI has committed funds from its various donors worth $4·5 billion that will cover existing programmes.
Full article available on thelancet.com
Sign up for our mailing list:
Thanks for visiting!
- Access Asia Pacific Biotech Brazil China Counterfeit developing countries Drug Prices Emerging Markets Ethics Generics Health Insurance HIV/AIDS India Industrial Policy Innovation Intellectual Property Managed health care medicines Nanotechnology News pharmaceutical pharmaceutical policy Pharmacists Pharmacoeconomics Philippines Poverty public policy Quality R&D Regulatory Affairs Reimbursement Risk sharing Russia Singapore South Africa Supply Chain Taiwan Trade Vaccines
Archives
- October 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- November 2011
- September 2011
- April 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- September 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- October 2008
- July 2008
- October 2007
- November 2006
- October 2006
- November 2005
