An overarching goal of the WTO is to make the management and application of intellectual property rights an integral part of broader public policy objectives in the area of public health.
See also: > More on TRIPS and public health
The WTO works actively with other international organizations, representatives from civil society, the academic community and the private sector. Its activities are regularly carried out in close cooperation with the World Health Organization (WHO) and the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO).
The WTO is actively promoting the attainment of Target E of MDG 8, which aims to provide access to affordable medicines on a sustainable basis in developing countries. The past decade has seen a strong policy emphasis on public health and access to medicines in the WTO, with a particular focus on clarifying the way in which flexibilities under the WTO’s Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS Agreement) should be interpreted and implemented regarding public health. This has included creating an additional pathway for access to medicines.
The WTO is actively promoting the attainment of Target E of MDG 8, which aims to provide access to affordable medicines in developing countries
The Doha Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and Public Health continues to serve as a landmark in recognizing the linkage between the WTO system and the broader public policy issue of health. It also serves as a benchmark for international cooperation on intellectual property and public health (see Box 4). By bringing together different policies and distinct areas of expertise, it has helped build a stronger framework for multilateral cooperation on intellectual property and public health, and supports governments in making use of TRIPS flexibilities.
For example, countries without sufficient manufacturing capacities can make effective use of compulsory licensing through the so-called “Paragraph 6 System”. This gives poor countries additional flexibility under the TRIPS Agreement to gain access to affordable medicines. Agreed in August 2003, the “Paragraph 6” system allows generic versions of patented medicines to be made under compulsory licence (that is, without the consent of the patent holder) for export to countries that cannot manufacture the medicines themselves.
Paragraph 6 is the first amendment agreed to in the entire package of WTO rules concluded in the Uruguay Round, a measure of the significance that WTO members have given to the question of access to medicines. The understanding that TRIPS supports a balanced and flexible framework for intellectual property protection and enforcement responsive to countries’ broader policy agendas has thus been reinforced, as well as the notion that TRIPS and its flexibilities are part of a wider national and international action to address public health problems.
Since the Doha Declaration was adopted, important developments in the WTO and elsewhere have already had a positive impact on access to medicines in developing countries. This includes making needed medicines available − especially anti-retroviral drugs to combat HIV/AIDS − at lower prices, enhancing international funding and using TRIPS flexibilities to leverage access to medicines. These developments have important repercussions for the achievement of Target E of MDG 8 and, more broadly, they also support Target B of MDG 6, which aims to achieve universal access to treatment of HIV/AIDS.
Box 4: Access to medicines and the Doha Declaration on TRIPS and Public Health
Measuring access to medicines is a complex task, but price is one key factor among others. The Doha Declaration on TRIPS and Public Health recognized concerns about effects on prices while noting the need for innovation. Since the Declaration was adopted in 2001, prices for many treatments have fallen significantly, in part due to generic competition and tiered pricing schemes (see graph below). Surveys also show a marked increase in the use of TRIPS flexibilities to promote access to medicines.
Falling prices of first-line combinations of some first-line anti-retroviral therapies for HIV-AIDS since 2000
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
The WTO’s contribution to the achievement of the MDGs goes beyond MDG 8. The WTO’s activities also have an impact on MDG 7, which aims to ensure environmental sustainability and to protect biodiversity. The Agreement establishing the WTO recognizes that members’ economic relations should be conducted in a way that allows “for the optimal use of the world’s resources in accordance with the objective of sustainable development”.
See also: > More on trade and environment > More on fisheries subsidies
While there is no specific agreement dealing with environmental issues, WTO members are nonetheless involved in negotiations that explore the relationship between trade and the environment, assessing their mutual impact and working to enhance their supportiveness. For example, an issue that is currently being negotiated by WTO members concerns specific disciplines on fisheries subsidies, which contribute to over-fishing. A significant reduction of such subsidies would have a positive impact on preserving the shrinking fish stocks of our oceans. This outcome will support MDG 7, as will negotiations which are taking place on the trade opening of environmental goods and services, which would help to boost global trade in this area. Improving countries’ ability to obtain high-quality environmental goods and to disseminate environmental technologies at lower costs would improve access to goods and technologies that can contribute to environmental protection.
WTO activities are also having a fundamental impact on MDG 1, which aims to eradicate poverty and hunger. While the relationship between open trade and growth is quite complex, it is widely recognized that the WTO’s work is having an impact on achieving MDG 1 because open trade, accompanied by sound domestic and international policies, can lead to enhanced levels of growth and poverty reduction. Attaining MDG 1 will thus support countries in meeting their social objectives and in achieving all the MDGs.
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
ConAgra Sued Over GMO ’100% Natural’ Cooking Oils BY MICHELE SIMON | AUGUST 24, 2011 OPINION If you use Wesson brand cooking oils, you may be able to join a class action against food giant ConAgra for deceptively marketing the products as natural.
These days it’s hard to walk down a supermarket aisle without bumping into a food product that claims to be “all-natural.” If you’ve ever wondered how even some junk food products can claim this moniker (witness: Cheetos Natural Puff White Cheddar Cheese Flavored Snacks – doesn’t that sound like it came straight from your garden?) the answer is simple if illogical: the Food and Drug Administration has not defined the term natural.
So food marketers, knowing that many shoppers are increasingly concerned about healthful eating, figured: why not just slap the natural label on anything we can get away with? That wishful thinking may soon be coming to an end if a few clever consumer lawyers have anything to say about it.
While various lawsuits have been filed in recent years claiming that food companies using the term natural are engaging in deceptive marketing, a suit filed in June in California against ConAgra could make the entire industrial food complex shake in its boots.
The plaintiff claims he relied on Wesson oils “100% natural” label, when the products are actually made from genetically modified organisms.
GMOs Not Exactly Natural, So Says Monsanto
Ironically, the complaint cites a definition of GMOs by none other than Monsanto, the company most notorious for its promotion of the technology. According to Monsanto, GMOs are: “Plants or animals that have had their genetic makeup altered to exhibit traits that are not naturally theirs.”
The complaint also quotes a GMO definition from the World Health Organization: “Organisms in which the genetic material (DNA) has been altered in a way that does not occur naturally.”
Four Wesson varieties are implicated in the case: Canola Oil, Vegetable Oil, Corn Oil, and Best Blend. And it’s not just on the label that ConAgra is using the natural claim, but also online and in print advertisements. (Additional silly health claims on the website include “cholesterol free”–vegetable oils couldn’t possibly contain cholesterol anyway.)
The complaint describes the extent of ConAgra’s deception, alleging the “labels are intended to evoke a natural, wholesome product.” And further:
The “100% Natural” statement is, like much of the label on Wesson Oils, displayed in vibrant green. The “Wesson” name is haloed by the image of the sun, and the Canola Oil features a picture of a green heart.
A green heart — you just can’t get any healthier than that. However, as registered dietitian Andy Bellatti told me: “These oils are high in omega 6 fatty acids, which in excessive amounts are actually bad for your heart.” Guess they left that part out of the green heart icon.
Supermarkets Chock-full of GMOs
But what makes this lawsuit especially intriguing is its potentially far-ranging impact. According to the Center for Food Safety: “upwards of 70 percent of processed foods on supermarket shelves — from soda to soup, crackers to condiments — contain genetically-engineered ingredients.” While it’s unclear how many of these products also claim to be natural, given all the greenwashing going on these days, it’s likely to number in the thousands.
Specifically, up to 85 percent of U.S. corn is genetically engineered as are 91 percent of soybeans, both extremely common ingredients in processed foods. Numerous groups including the Center for Food Safety have been calling attention to the potential hazards of GMOs for years. From their website:
A number of studies over the past decade have revealed that genetically engineered foods can pose serious risks to humans, domesticated animals, wildlife and the environment. Human health effects can include higher risks of toxicity, allergenicity, antibiotic resistance, immune-suppression and cancer.
Not exactly the stuff that green hearts are made of. The legal complaint also notes that on its corporate website (“but not on the Wesson site that consumers are more likely to visit”), ConAgra implies that its oils are genetically engineered. The company concludes: “Ultimately, consumers will decide what is acceptable in the marketplace based on the best science and public information available.”
But by being told the oils are “100% natural,” consumers can no longer make an informed decision as they are being misled.
Which reminds me of a great quote from Fast Food Nation author Eric Schlosser: “If they have to put the word ‘natural’ on a box to convince you, it probably isn’t.”
————————-
Michele Simon is a public health lawyer specializing in industry marketing and lobbying tactics. She is the author of Appetite for Profit: How the Food Industry Undermines Our Health and How to Fight Back, and research and policy director at Marin Institute, an alcohol industry watchdog group.
Logged
