Bitter Pills:Medicines & The Third World Poor | Page 174

delegation was unsuccessful in quashing the 1982 follow-up resolution but they
did get the wording changed to read that the Code had been "intended to, inter
alia, deal with these marketing practices." <30)
On the issue of a Pharmaceuticals code, the US delegate to the January 1982
meeting of the WHO Executive Board stated that he himself "did not think it
would be constructive to give that matter (the question of a WHO Code) any further
consideration particularly in view of the fact that the Director- General was shortly
to be engaging in consultations with the representatives of the International
Federation of Pharmaceuticals Manufacturers Associations. It was important
not to take any steps which might jeopardise the outcome of those consultations." <3I) His words were echoed by the US delegate at the May 1982 Assembly
who expressed the hope that the Assembly would "take no action that might
damage that cooperative relationship and prove counterproductive regarding the
supply of essential drugs to countries where they were most needed." <32> Other
US officials have recently been more explicit in referring to the code as "irrevocably
opposed by the U S " . <33)

RICH WORLD GOVERNMENTS
Most governments of drug-producing nations have a decidedly ambiguous
relationship with the local drug industry. This is particularly true of major drugexporting countries such as Britain.(34) An industry-funded publication refers to
the "dual and seemingly conflicting functions" of the British Department of
Health and Social Security (DHSS) and explains:' 'On the one hand, its role could
be seen as that of a regulatory authority with direct controls over the development,
marketing and promotion of drugs..." but "on the other hand, the DHSS is the
sponsoring department for the industry and is, therefore, keen to assist the latter's
performance, especially in the field of exports." (35)
EXPORT CONTROLS
Before a new drug can be marketed in Britain, manufacturers have to obtain a
product licence from the Government. These licences are made conditional on
the drug being approved by the Committee on Safety of Medicines, which makes
a thorough check on the safety, quality and efficacy of each new drug. But when
it comes to drugs produced for export the regulatory functions of Government
appear to be overshadowed by a desire to achieve a healthy export balance. Drug
exports are specifically exempted from these controls. (36) The same is true in
other major drug producing nations, such as Switzerland and France, which have
also excluded drugs for export from regulatory controls. (37)
This gives exporters carte blanche to export drugs that have been withdrawn at
home because they proved unsafe or ineffective. Effectively there is nothing to
stop overseas sales of drugs that would never have been licensed for sale on the
home market. In the words of a US Congressman, "under current law, companies
can pretty much export whatever they can convince ... people abroad to buy". (38)
167