fbpx

Month: April 2020

[Marketing Medium] Il prezzo calmierato per le mascherina è pericolo per la libertà, non solo d’impresa ma anche dei consumatori

Roma, IT – Ieri il Presidente Conte ha dichiarato che il prezzo delle mascherine chirurgiche sarà di 0.50 euro, Luca Bertoletti, European Affairs Manager per il Consumer Choice Center commenta: “quanto avvenuto ieri sera è pericoloso, e infatti ne vediamo già gli effetti. Molte farmacie, che avevano mascherine nei magazzini non le vendono più in quanto non riuscirebbero nemmeno a rientrare dei costi”. 

source http://meltwater.pressify.io/publication/5ea70c1f6139460004f70f74/5aa837df2542970e001981f6

[Marketing Medium] Il prezzo calmierato per le mascherina è pericolo per la libertà, non solo d’impresa ma anche dei consumatori

Roma, IT – Ieri il Presidente Conte ha dichiarato che il prezzo delle mascherine chirurgiche sarà di 0.50 euro, Luca Bertoletti, European Affairs Manager per il Consumer Choice Center commenta: “quanto avvenuto ieri sera è pericoloso, e infatti ne vediamo già gli effetti. Molte farmacie, che avevano mascherine nei magazzini non le vendono più in quanto non riuscirebbero nemmeno a rientrare dei costi”. 

from Consumer Choice Center https://ift.tt/2Y5sPRo

I celebrated World IP Day but many didn’t

Last Sunday (April 26th) marked World Intellectual Property Day. While the existence of IP has allowed innovators to enjoy the rewards of their invention, more and more voices speak up against patents and IP in general. So while I celebrated World IP Day many didn’t even want to show up to the party.

The current COVID-19 crises triggers many voices that ask to ban all patents of COVID-19 related tests, drugs, and vaccines. I stumbled ac ross some very wrong statements and want to highlight these and explain what their authors got wrong.

Michael Barker for instance writes:

Flowing from the relentless drive for super-profits, we can also understand the process by which big pharma makes decisions on the type of drugs they will prioritise for mass production. Medicines that can be sold to wealthy consumers in developed countries, are fast-tracked, while drugs and treatments that might benefit the poorest billions simply fall by the wayside. Human life is secondary to the pursuit of profits.

The author might not know that depending on the country you live in and the insurance you have, drug prices can vary enormously, not because of the decisions of the manufacturer, but because of the local reimbursement models. However, producers also sell at different initial costs in developing countries. The British company GlaxoSmithKline usually caps their drug prices in emerging markets at 25% of the price they ask for in developed countries. In many cases the price is way below the 25% cap. The same company offers their HIV/AIDS treatment at merely variable cost in South Africa. Since 2001 the Swiss company Novartis supplies the fixed-dose artemisinin-based combination therapy (ACT) without profit to public-sector buyers. Over 850 million antimalarial treatments have been delivered to patients in more than 60 malaria-endemic countries. American biotechnology company Gilead has an access partnership campaign that licenses out their drugs to local partners in low- and middle-income countries, selling drugs at cost.   

Another group that sometimes totally misunderstands the pharmaceutical research industry is the well-respected NGO Doctors without Borders (MSF). While I am a personal fan of their work on the front lines of health conflicts, I wholeheartedly disagree with their understanding of patents and profits.

MSF states:

The international medical humanitarian organisation Médecins Sans Frontières/Doctors Without Borders (MSF) today called for no patents or profiteering on drugs, tests, or vaccines used for the COVID-19 pandemic, and for governments to prepare to suspend and override patents and take other measures, such as price controls, to ensure availability, reduce prices and save more lives.

Price controls will actually lead to shortages – We have seen this in the past and see this in the current COVID-19 crisis. Whenever a government limits the price of a good, its supply tends to go down. To controlling prices and at the same time ensuring availability is just and oxymoron. If MSF genuinely wants to save more lives (which I believe), they should encourage flexible prices and patent-protection – At the same time they might want to reconsider their own policy of not accepting in kind donations of the pharmaceutical industry…

MSF campaigners raise a point in favour of eliminating private property protection, saying that the ownership hasn’t even been established through private funds. Since manufacturers receive public grants for their work, their results should also be public ownership. While it is true that one in three Euros spent on pharmaceutical research is public money, it is also true that this public expenditure is offset by the taxes paid. The industry, employees, and customers pay directly a much higher amount of taxes than is received subsidies. Total R&D expenditure in the UK in 2015 was 4.1bn GBP (of which roughly 1.2 GBP are public funds) and direct tax contribution was 300% higher at 3.7. Billion.

Neue Meta-Studie: „Insekten-Apokalypse findet nicht statt”

Eine neue Studie zeigt zwar einen Rückgang der Landinsekten, gleichzeitig aber eine Zunahme der Süßwasserinsekten. Klimawandel und Landwirtschaft beeinflussten dies nicht. Streit ist vorprogrammiert.

Schmetterling

Eine neue Meta-Analyse zu Insektenpopulationen dürfte die Diskussion um das Insektensterben wieder anheizen. Der Analyst Bill Wirtz von der Firma “Consumer Choice Center” aus Brüssel hat nach eigener Aussage die bisher größte und umfassendste Auswertung von Insektenstudien und Zählungen durchgeführt, die es bislang gab.

Seine Ergebnisse würden einige „der Missverständnisse zum vermeintlichen Artensterben der letzten Jahre“ korrigieren, wie der Senior Policy Analyst am Freitag in einer Presseinformation mitteilte. Er hoffe, dass die Diskussion wieder in eine weniger sensationsgetriebene Gangart rücken wird.

“Diese Analyse von 166 Langzeitstudien, die zwischen 1925 und 2018 an 1.676 Standorten auf der ganzen Welt durchgeführt wurden, gibt den vorhandenen Studien zu diesem Thema endlich die nötige Nuancierung. Seit Jahren wurden weniger tiefgreifende Forschungsergebnisse herangezogen, die behaupten, dass wir es mit einem Insektenrückgang apokalyptischen Ausmaßes zu tun haben. Wir wissen jetzt, dass dies nicht zutreffend war”, sagt Wirtz.

Seiner Aussage nach hat diese Studie einen Rückgang der Insektenpopulation festgestellt. Dies sei sicherlich ein Grund für weitere Untersuchungen, doch die Zahlen zeigten, dass der Effekt ungefähr sechsmal geringer sei als in früheren Studien. Ein Teil des Rückgangs der Landinsekten werde durch eine Zunahme von Süßwasserinsekten wie Mücken und Eintagsfliegen ausgeglichen, erklärte er weiter.

Während in früheren Studien der Verursacher im Klimawandel und in der modernen Landwirtschaft gesehen wurde, habe diese Meta-Analyse keinen klaren Zusammenhang zwischen Klimawandel und Insektenpopulationen gefunden, so Wirtz weiter. „Was Landwirtschaft betrifft, so zeigt diese Studie, dass der Anbau von Nutzpflanzen tatsächlich den Insektenpopulationen zugute gekommen ist. Die Forscher haben gezeigt, dass die Zerstörung des Lebensraums durch die Urbanisierung zum Rückgang der terrestrischen Insektenpopulationen geführt hat.“

“Eine Reihe von Medien haben frühere Studien genutzt, um auffällige Schlagzeilen zu schreiben. In dem Bemühen, den Nachrichtenkonsumenten ein vollständiges Bild zu vermitteln, hoffe ich, dass diese Medien jetzt über diese neuen Erkenntnisse berichten”, so Wirtz abschließend.

Originally published here.


The Consumer Choice Center is the consumer advocacy group supporting lifestyle freedom, innovation, privacy, science, and consumer choice. The main policy areas we focus on are digital, mobility, lifestyle & consumer goods, and health & science.

The CCC represents consumers in over 100 countries across the globe. We closely monitor regulatory trends in Ottawa, Washington, Brussels, Geneva and other hotspots of regulation and inform and activate consumers to fight for #ConsumerChoice. Learn more at consumerchoicecenter.org

World Intellectual Property Day 2020

On Sunday, April 26th 2020 the world celebrates the Intellectual Property Day.

On the occasion, the Innovation, Brands and Intellectual Property – The Future of Europe Intergroup led by MEP Gianna Gancia sent a letter to Ms Margrethe Vestager Executive Vice-President and Ms Mariya Gabriel Commissioner for Innovation and Research European Commission stressing the importance of safeguarding intellectual property rights.

[Marketing Medium] Large study debunks ‘insect apocalypse’ narrative

Brussels, BE – A new meta-analysis of insect populations*, representing the largest and most comprehensive assessment to date rectifies some of the misconceptions of the past years. The Consumer Choice Center’s Senior Policy Analyst Bill Wirtz says that this sobering study should put the discussion back into a more reasoned perspective.

from Consumer Choice Center https://ift.tt/2Y6fnNf

[Marketing Medium] Large study debunks ‘insect apocalypse’ narrative

Brussels, BE – A new meta-analysis of insect populations*, representing the largest and most comprehensive assessment to date rectifies some of the misconceptions of the past years. The Consumer Choice Center’s Senior Policy Analyst Bill Wirtz says that this sobering study should put the discussion back into a more reasoned perspective.

source http://meltwater.pressify.io/publication/5ea1d7f7a5c7670004f1d76d/5aa837df2542970e001981f6

A roadmap for the NHS: lessons from Germany

In both Germany and the United Kingdom, around 0.18 per cent of the total population has recently tested positive for coronavirus. While the spread of the pandemic is roughly equal in these countries, the fatality rate is 420 per cent higher for patients treated by the NHS compared with those treated in Germany. This is because Germany’s hospitals are better placed to be resilient in times of crisis, thanks to the private and competitive aspects of the country’s healthcare system.

Germany’s decentralised and private laboratory network had already tested over two per cent of its population when the UK’s figure still stood at a meagre 0.7%. Britain’s centralised testing system, and its failure to scale up Covid-19 tests, might explain part of this mortality gap. One could assume that only very severe cases are being tested by the NHS and, as such, the fatality rate of this more concentrated group is higher.

Even if you make very generous adjustments to the figures and assume that Britain’s fatality rate would remain unchanged even if the NHS tested as many people as the German system, the UK would still have a 49 per cent higher death rate.

Not only are the NHS’s testing facilities incapable of dealing with black swan events, the entire healthcare system simply doesn’t have sufficient resilience to minimise the harm caused to patients by a virus such as Covid-19.

Conversely, Germany’s mainly private and non-profit hospital system leads the way in Europe when it comes to successfully facing this wave of patients. In early March, hospitals had already freed up beds in intensive care by pushing back elective surgeries, and the total capacity of ICU beds was ramped up 40 per cent within a month. Germany’s hospitals now have a total of 40,000 ICU beds and 30,000 beds with respiration units.

And all of this was achieved while still ensuring the provision of critical services such as cancer care and screening, which is something that the NHS is struggling to do – a problem that may cause more harm than Covid-19.

Thanks to the recent increase, Germany has now 48 ICU beds per 100,000 inhabitants, which is more than seven times the capacity the UK currently has. This month, the NHS published the occupancy rate of critical care beds in February, which showed over 80 per cent of those were in use. And while Germany was deploying a new public database showing critical care capacity per hospital, which is updated at least once a day, the NHS paused the publication of many of its own statistics, and those that are released are at least a month old.

What’s more, Germany’s new online ICU capacity register was built overnight, a tool that provides patients and doctors with invaluable guidance. One map, for example, shows that in Bavaria, which is the state worst-hit by Covid-19, just 16.1 per cent of ICU beds are occupied by patients with coronavirus. It also shows the available number of empty ICU beds. Bavaria still has 37 per cent of all its ICU beds empty and can, therefore, comfortably treat three times more Covid-19 patients than now.

This successful approach has taken place within a system where the government owns less than 30 per cent of all hospitals. Germany’s universal healthcare system embraces competition and private ownership of hospitals and outpatient services. So while the social insurance system covers 90 per cent of the population, the provision of care is mainly carried out by private for-profit hospitals or charities. 

Simply put, private hospitals and competition lead to much more efficient structures, and Germany’s decentralised healthcare system, which allowed for a speedy mitigation strategy, is now showing its value by saving thousands of lives. Indeed, Germany is not only weathering this storm better than the NHS but it is even able to fly in and treat hundreds of patients from Italy, France and Spain.

British policymakers will need to show courage in the coming months and be honest about the failings of the UK’s healthcare system during this crisis. There are two crucial lessons that will need to be learned in order to prevent, or at least mitigate, another lacklustre response in the future.

The first is that introducing more market mechanisms in the NHS would not mean that patients were denied care – you can have universal healthcare in a social insurance model too. And the second is that having more private hospitals does not necessarily lead to fewer hospital beds, but a better allocation of skills and resources. Indeed, it allowed Germany to scale up its ICU capacity, as well as keeping services such as cancer treatments and screenings open in different locations.

The centralised nature of NHS does not allow for any part of the chain to fail. Unfortunately, failure is in our nature and less centralised systems are therefore necessary in order to achieve resilience and adaptability in times of urgent need.

We should make the UK fit for the next nasty virus by decentralising testing and allowing for more private sector involvement in our healthcare system. It’s high time we faced the facts about the NHS and stopped ignoring success stories from around the world.

Originally published here.


The Consumer Choice Center is the consumer advocacy group supporting lifestyle freedom, innovation, privacy, science, and consumer choice. The main policy areas we focus on are digital, mobility, lifestyle & consumer goods, and health & science.

The CCC represents consumers in over 100 countries across the globe. We closely monitor regulatory trends in Ottawa, Washington, Brussels, Geneva and other hotspots of regulation and inform and activate consumers to fight for #ConsumerChoice. Learn more at consumerchoicecenter.org

Scroll to top
en_USEN