IP: Re: Canada Overrides Patent for Cipro to Treat Anthrax -- 2 items worth reading

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

> Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2001 08:39:11 -0400
> From: Dan Steinberg <synthesis () videotron ca>
> To: farber () cis upenn edu
> Subject: Re: IP: Canada Overrides Patent for Cipro to Treat Anthrax
>
>
>
> David Farber wrote:
>
> > [ I hope we don't need the drugs but the fact  our government refuses to
> > order cheap generics bothers me. I hope Bayer does not contribute to any
> > election pots.  djf]
> >
> > Canada, taking an unusual step that the United States has resisted, said
> > yesterday that it had overridden Bayer's patent for Cipro, an antibiotic to
> > treat anthrax, and ordered a million tablets of a generic version from a
> > Canadian company.
> >
> Dave,
>
> I've been following the events since 9/11 with great interest, and my main
> sources have been (and continue to be) your list and CNN (in that order). What
> has impressed me most is the quality of information here. You, with your 
> limited
> resources to check things, manage to get it right first time waaaaaaaay 
> more than
> C "all anthrax all the time" NN. I believe in most cases, it is because you
> bother to check things, something news services appear to have forgotten 
> to do.
> Or is it that you know the right people to ask?
>
> What I want to bring up today (pardon the somewhat disjointed rant), is a
> continuation of a theme that started almost immediately: the tendency to 
> either
> overreact or react to a problem that isn't there. This started fist with the
> regulations about  the elimination of curbside checkin. I remember right away
> comment here on this list to the effect of 'what kinda threat does this
> eliminate?'.
>
> In times of stress there seems to be a 'need' for people to act. I remember
> reading something (I believe in Time) about the people of the city of 
> Marietta,
> Ohio.  Although they were as far from NYC or DC as you can get, they were 
> deeply
> affected by the tragedy and worried about local threats.
>
> Today I thinking about anthrax. I went to see my doctor today (for something
> totally unrelated to infectious diseases) and took advantage of her 
> knowledge to
> ask this question;
> "Listen....I have read about antibiotic resistance and how if we use 
> antibiotics
> indiscriminately we end up with resistant strains. I know the drill. I studied
> molecular biology and some drug biochemistry.  Can you tell me....how 
> something
> that has been bottle up the lab all these years, not out there being 
> treated (and
> mis-treated) with antibiotics....can you tell me please why the drug they 
> use is
> CIPRO?
> When did anthrax become penicillin-resistant?"
>
> ...dead silence...
>
> So I did a bit of research...seems that anthrax does respond to a number 
> of other
> antibiotics...so why is CIPRO on everyone's lips?
> why is a senator talking about getting around Bayer's intellectual 
> property and
> going generic? Why did I read about Canada's action (above)?[1]
>
> Is this a case of groupthink, someone saying something and the rest of the 
> room
> nodding heads?
>
> I know anthrax is scary, but is that any reason to rush off in all 
> directions at
> once? This isnnt the first mis-information about anthrax propagated.  I 
> remember
> when the anthrax story first broke...it seemed like everyone was testing 
> positive
> on the spot. I remember thinking 'that cant be right? they cant culture 
> bacillus
> on the spot. Its gotta take hours not seconds to culture". OK. so the 
> newshounds
> knew that they had erred. Perhaps this would cause them to better check the
> information?
>
> Wellllllllllllllllll nope.  Another one: soon after the anthrax scare came 
> out,
> some talking head said... 'its gotta take millions and billions of dollars to
> culture anthrax...Onlythe most advanced nations can do it."
> I was thinking ...no...............I could do it on the stovetop....well 
> not on
> the stovetop but in a fermenter for sure...Last time I checked I was a
> middle-class entitiy no where near large nationhood.
>
> Then....when someone else with a bio degree called them on it, that 
> statement was
> changed (by a different talking head) to... 'ok its easy to make but it takes
> million-dollar machine to get the right particle size"...
>
> and I thought...hmmmmmm nobody ever heard of filters?????  no one thought of
> using columns and gels?
>
> and sure enough...soon someone said it didnt need that fancy equipment 
> there were
> other ways to get the size down...
>
> Then...when everyone got scared about the mail system I was thinking...
> Geeez...this bug cant be that hard to kill. heat should do it... or why 
> not use
> those oh-so-controversial irradiating machines they use for food?  A few gamma
> rays and its all good, right?"
>
> Was I surprised when someone testified to taht effect before congress? 
> welll by
> this time.... I WAS!!!!!
> finally I thought...here's someone thinking and not panicking...
> someone should hire this this person. Someone should put this person on that
> Presidents Council for Critical Infrastructure.
>
> Look I'm no genius. I'm not a doctor.  And my biology/biochem knowledge is 
> more
> than a decade away from being current. So how is it that just sitting watching
> CNN (or a canadian news channel CNN by no means has a monopoly), every time I
> turn on the tube I can sit there and say 'noooooooo that can't be right' 
> and go
> upstairs and within 5 minutes find authoritative references.
>
> But this goes beyond reporting. Were it simply reporters in a rush, I would be
> content to do the armchair second-guessing thing.  But it's not. People in
> government are making decisions, like rushing off to buy CIPRO, deciding to
> require printed receipts with e-tickets, etc etc....
>
> I think if the US is going into a protracted conflict, the last thing it 
> needs is
> to be expending more energy than it needs.
> I think the best and the brightest have to find a way to come forward....
>
> Dave, I don't mind if you print this rambe, but my intent was more this: 
> you know
> people in DC.  Is there anyone there you can send this to that might get 
> someone
> to pause and take a deep breath?
>
> [1]As an aside, Canada has a thriving generic drug industry because of 
> compulsory
> licencing built into the law. I havent had time to check but for all we know
> there is already generic for Cipro available and no patent-busting is taking
> place.
> --
> Dan Steinberg
>
> SYNTHESIS:Law & Technology
> 35, du Ravin  phone: (613) 794-5356
> Chelsea, Quebec  fax:   (819) 827-4398
> J9B 1N1                 e-mail:synthesis () videotron ca


and

Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2001 08:51:39 -0400
From: Dan Steinberg <synthesis () videotron ca>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
To: Dave Farber <farber () cis upenn edu>
Subject: follow-up to my rant

http://www.nytimes.com/2001/10/19/business/19CANA.html
seems like Apotex has already been making the generic. When I saw
pictures of 'newly-manufactured' pills I knew this was not a new thing.
Having worked in the drug industry I can tell you it takes more than a
few days to gear up to produce something. It's not rocket science but it
is chemical engineering.
FYI compulsory licencing is a wonderful thing. It does keep the drug
prices down and despite what the drug companies claim, doesnt seem to
stifle research. It used to be 7 years in Canada before your Reagan
administration pressured (then) Prime Minister Mulroney to lengthen the
period.
ok. enough rant for now. have a super day Dave and keep up the great
work!
--
Dan Steinberg
SYNTHESIS:Law & Technology
35, du Ravin phone: (613) 794-5356
Chelsea, Quebec fax: (819) 827-4398
J9B 1N1 e-mail:synthesis () videotron ca





For archives see: http://lists.elistx.com/archives/interesting-people/