Bitter Pills:Medicines & The Third World Poor | Page 171
restrictive terms for the transfer of essential drug technology from rich to poor.
In contrast to WHO, UNCTAD stresses that it is unrealistic not to include the
private drug market in any rationalisation. The volume of private sales makes
this essential to protect the interests of the majority.(9)
UNIDO has carried out feasibility studies and provided technical assistance to
a number of countries in setting up local production of finished drugs. UNIDO
is also involved in projects to establish the production of bulk drugs using multipurpose plants. (l0) UNICEF shares WHO'S close involvement in extending
primary health care services and has its own drug procurement operation based
in Copenhagen. Essential drugs are bought in bulk and re-sold to developing
countries well below market prices. (ll)
UNICEF, UNCTAD, UNIDO and other UN agencies are also all collaborating
with WHO on different aspects of the WHO Action Programme on Essential
Drugs, which is now the most comprehensive international programme on Third
World drug policies.(l2) The Action Programme emerged under the aegis of Dr.
Mahler and the first significant step towards its adoption was taken in 1978 when
the World Health Assembly passed a resolution (WH A31.32) urging member states
to adopt essential drug lists, generic names and other measures including tougher
drug legislation. The resolution also mandated WHO to cooperate with other UN
agencies in assisting member states to adopt new drug policies and continue
discussions with drug manufacturers on the supply of essential drugs. WHO also
received a mandate to evolve strategies for reducing drug prices and to develop
a code of drug marketing practice. (13)
The first major evaluation of progress on the Action Programme took place four
years later - at the May 1982 World Health Assembly. (14) The delegate from
Ghana echoed the views of other member states in referring to the Action
Programme as "one of the most exciting developments in the international health
field".(15) But many delegates felt there had been rather more talk than action
on the programme and some were particularly critical that dialogue with industry
had been both so protracted and so unproductive. This view was expressed more
forcefully by the Algerian delegate. He was highly sceptical about industry's
motivation in switching from opposition to the concept of 'essential' drugs to
a desire to participate and referred to the industry as "a new Trojan horse'' inside
the Action Programme.