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.