Why WHO needs to change counterfeit definition?

[Guest guest]

Hi,

Please join me in the e-discussion on " Why WHO needs to change

counterfeit definition? " which has been started on NetRUM since

yesterday.

Dr Vijay Thawani

Moderator

[Guest guest]

Dear Sir:

Besides India, Thailand, Brazil, Argentina, Venezuela, Chile, Sri

Lanka, the Maldives, Cuba and Bangladesh have spoken against the WHO

task force's new proposed definition that is largely considered to

be too open-ended and vague.Brazil and South Africa have

categorically endorsed India's stand on the issue that is going to

be discussed at the WHO meeting at Bonn, Germany on 24-26 November,

2008.

Dr. Surinder Singh, drug controller general of India has pointed out

that Calling trademark violations counterfeit may also mean that if

a drug is not registered in a country then it becomes a counterfeit,

which is completely wrong. The drug may not be registered because it

may not suit that country's environment. This does not make it a

counterfeit.

WHO IMPACT, while setting out the definition of fake drugs, has

noted that counterfeiting can apply to both branded and generic

products. It says that counterfeits may include products with

correct ingredients / components, with wrong ingredients /

components, without active ingredients, with incorrect amounts of

active ingredients, or with fake packaging. On the contrary, health

groups and generic industry representatives believe such a

definition would create an entry barrier for legitimate non-patented

or generic drugs that are similar either in look or colour.

Furthermore activists are also sceptical about the independence of

the agency implementing these measures, and have urged the members

of the World Health Assembly, the apex gathering at the WHO, to

reject the resolution, which is trying to forge a global strategy on

an issue that has largely been dealt by countries on their own so

far.

With regards

Dr. Geer M. Ishaq

>

> Hi,

> Please join me in the e-discussion on " Why WHO needs to change

> counterfeit definition? " which has been started on NetRUM since

> yesterday.

> Dr Vijay Thawani

> Moderator

>

[Guest guest]

Hi,

counterfeits may include products with correct ingredients This statement in my opinion does not suit the definition.

-Anupama

From: ishaqgeer <ishaqgeer@...>Subject: Re: Why WHO needs to change counterfeit definition?netrum Date: Saturday, 22 November, 2008, 2:31 PM

Dear Sir:Besides India, Thailand, Brazil, Argentina, Venezuela, Chile, Sri Lanka, the Maldives, Cuba and Bangladesh have spoken against the WHO task force's new proposed definition that is largely considered to be too open-ended and vague.Brazil and South Africa have categorically endorsed India's stand on the issue that is going to be discussed at the WHO meeting at Bonn, Germany on 24-26 November, 2008.Dr. Surinder Singh, drug controller general of India has pointed out that Calling trademark violations counterfeit may also mean that if a drug is not registered in a country then it becomes a counterfeit, which is completely wrong. The drug may not be registered because it may not suit that country's environment. This does not make it a counterfeit.WHO IMPACT, while setting out the definition of fake drugs, has noted that counterfeiting can apply to both branded and generic

products. It says that counterfeits may include products with correct ingredients / components, with wrong ingredients / components, without active ingredients, with incorrect amounts of active ingredients, or with fake packaging. On the contrary, health groups and generic industry representatives believe such a definition would create an entry barrier for legitimate non-patented or generic drugs that are similar either in look or colour. Furthermore activists are also sceptical about the independence of the agency implementing these measures, and have urged the members of the World Health Assembly, the apex gathering at the WHO, to reject the resolution, which is trying to forge a global strategy on an issue that has largely been dealt by countries on their own so far.With regardsDr. Geer M. Ishaq>> Hi,> Please join me in the e-discussion on "Why WHO needs to change > counterfeit definition?" which has been started on NetRUM since > yesterday.> Dr Vijay Thawani> Moderator>

Bollywood news, movie reviews, film trailers and more! Click here.

[Guest guest]

Yes Geer. I feel it is the manipulative policy and dirty economics

of the developed nations to subjugate the developing world and

coerce them into submission.

The very fact that the issues affecting the marginalised countries

are discussed without their participation indicates the intentions

behind. These countries may not be economically powerful but then

they do have the power to participate effectively, think rationally,

plan and discuss what is good for them. If this is the way world

order is being forced, no brains required to forecast the doom of

the planners. The affected countries are sure to stand up, unite and

fight against the systemic choking of generic medicines which is

being brought about in the garb of checking counterfeits.

Vijay

> >

> > Hi,

> > Please join me in the e-discussion on " Why WHO needs to change

> > counterfeit definition? " which has been started on NetRUM since

> > yesterday.

> > Dr Vijay Thawani

> > Moderator

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Yes Anupama. You have correctly noticed.

Hence the founded fear that the new definition of counterfeits will

attack the genric availability.

It is well thought, planned, well orchestrated, systemic

annihilation of generic industry.

Vijay

> >

> > Hi,

> > Please join me in the e-discussion on " Why WHO needs to change

> > counterfeit definition? " which has been started on NetRUM since

> > yesterday.

> > Dr Vijay Thawani

> > Moderator

> >

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> Add more friends to your messenger and enjoy! Go to

http://messenger./invite/

>

[Guest guest]

Dear Dr. Anupama:

The statement that counterfeits may include products with correct

ingredients/components actually implies products that have correct

ingredients and/or components but are suspected of a false

representation in relation to their identity, history or source. Full

definition is reproduced below:

IMPACT has defined a " counterfeit medical product " It notes that

currently the definition is absent or inadequate—in a broad manner.

It has defined " a medical product... (as)... counterfeit when there

is a false representation in relation to its identity, history or

source. This applies to the product, its container or other packaging

or labelling information. Counterfeiting can apply to both branded

and generic products. Counterfeits may include products with correct

ingredients/components, with wrong ingredients/components, without

active ingredients, with incorrect amounts of active ingredients, or

with fake packaging. "

With regards

Dr. Geer M. Ishaq

> >

> > Hi,

> > Please join me in the e-discussion on " Why WHO needs to change

> > counterfeit definition? " which has been started on NetRUM since

> > yesterday.

> > Dr Vijay Thawani

> > Moderator

> >

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> Add more friends to your messenger and enjoy! Go to

http://messenger./invite/

>