Yesterday the association Médecins du Monde has broadcast an advertising campaign "incisive" on the Internet about the price of abusive drug treatment. The campaign has, in fact, been refused broadcast by "traditional" displays by the Authority of professional regulation of advertising (ARPP). JCDecaux, MediaTransports and the Insert have therefore refused the displays of this campaign. Econology, like many other sites, relays this campaign in high resolution images, with some nice analysis and links ...
According to this article Of the world:
(...) the association denounces the fate of sofosbuvir first antiviral effective direct action against hepatitis C, delivered through "almost 41 000 euros". "And whose price continues to rise," says Ms. Sivignon, encrypting more than 200 000 the number of sick people who "would need" against 30 000 treatment.
The drug would cost only 100 euros to produce, according to a study researcher Andrew Hill (University of Liverpool) cited by Doctors of the World. The association requested the suspension of the patent and in generic manufacture to reduce the price. In vain.
"These high prices threaten our solidarity health system. The state has failed in its regulatory mission, "says Ms. Sivignon. (...)
Health professionals have obviously reacted strongly to this campaign and not very courteously through their trade union "The Companies of Medicine", the LEEM (formerly SNIP):
(...) Leem, tried Monday to defuse the controversy. The organization that represents the interests of Sanofi, GSK and other pharmaceutical companies highlights the "About outrageous caricatures and run by Doctors of the World." Drug prices are set by the Economic Committee for Health Products "through negotiations with manufacturers," he recalls. The argument is undermined by Doctors of the World. "The system lacks transparency: this committee does not include either health professionals or users," says its president (...).
Inrocks speak them outright censorship ... and more specifically relates the words of ARPP:
"We particularly draw your attention to the risk of negative reactions that could be caused by the line of communication chosen by representatives of the pharmaceutical industry. Indeed the companies thus implicated could consider that such a campaign undermines their image and causes them serious harm and decide to act in this direction. "
What is quite shocking in this argument is that the ARPP considers a patient as an "ordinary client" ... no one does not choose to be sick! These words of damage to the image and potential prejudice to pharmaceutical companies through this campaign is particularly hateful and contemptuous of human life!
MDM and replied:
"Research and development costs are overestimated and the actual amounts are confidential and much anyway is funded by public money through grants or research tax credits"
It is well known that pharmaceutical companies are children hearts and only want the good of the people in a most complete selflessness ^^ ... Arte had investigated in 2011 and spread a very good documentary about this: Diseases for sale to see here!