Doing India Proud: Generic drug makers up the ante, again

November 3, 2003

Yet another feather was added to the cap of India's pharmaceutical

industry when Cipla, Ranbaxy and Matrix along with a South African

drug maker, Aspen, joined hands with the Clinton Foundation to provide

an estimated two million African and Caribbean people cheaper Anti-

RetroViral drugs. The price cut is truly magnificent — down from a

dollar a day per person to 38 cents — and all parties concerned deserve

to be commended for this initiative.

The Clinton Foundation's involvement is only one of the numerous global

endorsements which have come the way of Indian generic firms. Cipla

was the first to slash costs when it offered its drugs at $365 per person

per annum, down from the then prevailing $1,000, and the same was

widely welcomed by African governments and medical charities; other

Indian companies followed with their own price reductions which led

pharmaceutical firms to offer discounted rates for their patented

medicines; and the WHO in its first-ever nomination of generic

companies to its global list of approved AIDS drugs suppliers ensured

Cipla was on it — all these actions only reflect the pioneering role that

our drug manufacturers have been playing in the global AIDS drugs

scenario.

Additionally, our drug makers have proven beyond a doubt that profits

and public health considerations need not be at cross-purposes. For

instance, where Cipla and Ranbaxy have agreed to slash prices today,

they expect to recover investments through higher volumes. Now, patent-

holders must do their bit for improved access to drugs. While it is no

one's case that R & D giants match the price cuts offered by generic

makers (original research does cost a lot more than reverse

engineering), more can be done.

Discounted on-patent drugs continue to remain expensive for the most

needy. How about making further room for price cuts? GlaxoKline

recently cut the price of its ARVs as well as allowed Aspen to sell

generic versions of its drugs to the private sector across sub-Saharan

Africa, but in response to an adverse ruling of South Africa's

Competition Commission. How about voluntarily issuing licences to local

companies? How about introducing differentiated packaging for cheaper

drugs meant for developing nations, instead of citing — as a reason for

inadequate action — fears about their diversion to European and

American markets? Greater price competition will serve not just the sick,

but also industry.

Recommended Posts