TOPIC-1:Time for pharma
course correction
The Finance Ministry’s decision to
withdraw customs duty exemptions for 76 life-saving drugs will at once
make them more expensive and impact patients who are already paying a high
price for such medical treatment. It is important to keep in mind that a
majority of Indians meet health care costs through out-of-pocket expenditure,
and any increase is bound to adversely affect them. It is true that the customs
duty waiver is an interim measure, and that the list has to be
revised periodically. Certain drugs now removed from the list are either no
longer used by patients or are being manufactured in India at a lower cost than
the imported ones, and therefore should be removed from it anyway. However, it
is not clear what “public interest” is served by removing certain essential
medicines that are either not manufactured in India or whose demand currently
exceeds local manufacturing capacity. While the government has been enthusiastic about withdrawing the exemption for
76 drugs, it has failed to include certain life-saving or essential drugs that
have been launched recently and are under patent protection. This indicates
that consultations have not been broad-based; this has to be corrected as the
patient’s interest should be the priority. Unlike in the case of other commodities where the consumer is the
decision-maker, doctors’ prescription preferences, sometimes based on partisan considerations, dictate whether a patient
ends up buying imported drugs even when locally manufactured options are
available at a lower price. It is for this reason that the withdrawal of 22 per
cent customs duty exemption on imported drugs could have an impact on a
patient’s budget; imported active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs) will also
increase the cost of generics made locally.
Since the late 1990s, India has lost
out to China in the API market. Active as well as enabling
support from the government in various forms helped the Chinese industry flood
the Indian market with cheap APIs. While the product patent regime that came into full force since 2005 and
the flooding of the market with Chinese APIs may appear to be genuine reasons for giving the Indian industry
cover to catch up, any protection cannot be long-lasting. The only way for the
Indian drug industry to grow is by investing in research and development and in
producing novel drugs that enjoy patent protection. India is the pharmacy of
the South, but that dominance is restricted to generics.
This has to change, and the government has to extend support in larger measure.
As is the case in the U.S., many drugs that go on to become commercially
profitable have their origins in academic and government institutions.
Unfortunately, the recent decision to cut research funding will not help the
industry. The earlier the government realises this and changes its priorities,
the better it would be for the country.
vocubulary:
1.customs : the official department that administers and collects the duties levied
by a government on imported goods.
2.exemptions : the
action of freeing or state of being free from an obligation or liability
imposed on others.
3.bound : a
leaping movement towards or over something.
4.adversely : two
things working against one another.
5.waiver : an act
or instance of waiving a right or claim.
6.interim : an interim dividend, profit, etc.
7.enthusiastic :
having or showing intense and eager enjoyment, interest, or approval.
8.commodities : a
useful or valuable thing.
9.partisan : a strong supporter of a party, cause, or
person.
10.enabling : give
(someone) the authority or means to do something; make it possible for.
11.regime : a
government, especially an authoritarian one.
12.genuine :truly
what something is said to be; authentic.
13.generics :a
consumer product having no brand name or registered trademark.
TOPIC-2:Adhering to
basics and freedom
The
Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) has to be commended for batting unambiguously for net neutrality, the principle of
non-discrimination that is vital for the Internet to remain an open platform.
Its decision was made clear on Monday when it prohibited
telecom providers from charging differential rates for data services. The
regulator’s stance is commendable for two
other reasons as well. One, it had to face enormous
pressures to tinker with the way the
Internet is governed. And, two, net neutrality, with its numerous
interpretations, is a complex concept. The latest ruling
could no doubt set the tone for regulators across the globe, especially those
of countries that have socio-economic features akin to
India’s. More important, it would ensure that generations of Indians are not
forced to be satisfied with services that pretend
to be the Internet itself, robbing them of the real benefits of the medium.
TRAI’s decision would bring relief and cheer to the millions of Indians as also
some voluntary groups that admirably
campaigned for months together for this result, worried as they were that the
regulator would give up on net neutrality. The danger had seemed that real. In
the last year or so, there have been more than a few attempts by the big
players to offer Internet services that intrinsically
seemed to violate this principle. The public debate on net neutrality began
during late 2014 when India’s top telecom carrier Bharti Airtel decided to
charge users extra for the use of applications with which they can make free
calls over the Internet.
But the most prominent and persistent
among the companies has to be Facebook, which spent a lot of time in
pitching its Free Basics initiative as an altruistic
effort that would help millions of India’s Internet have-nots. Its founder,
Mark Zuckerberg, took a personal interest in the campaign. Facebook’s global
rebranding of its internet.org initiative as a platform open for all but adhering to Facebook’s standards, which offered
“free and basic services”, was arguably the consequence of the debate over net
neutrality in the country. The point about providing at least some access to
millions of new users for free, who otherwise cannot afford it, must have been
difficult for TRAI to ignore. And that is why it is important to recognise that
a ‘no’ to Free Basics does not imply a failure on the part of TRAI to recognise the
importance of catering to the Internet have-nots.
In fact, the regulator has noted that it is not against the provision of
limited free data that allows a user to explore the Internet. Simply put, it
finds this route palatable because the
choice is with the user. This is also a route that Free Basics could explore in
the immediate future in order to stay alive in India. The regulator’s problem
with a price-based differentiation has more to do with the fact that in a
market such as India it would distort
consumer choice and have consequences that
wouldn’t be understood easily. The ruling also suggests that while TRAI
recognises the need for India to bridge the digital divide, it realises that
compromising the basic ideals of the Internet is not the way to do it.
VOCABULARY:
1. unambiguously :open to or having several possible meanings or
interpretations; equivocal.
2.non-discrimination :fair and unprejudiced treatment of
different categories of people.
3.vital : absolutely necessary; essential.
4.prohibited : that has been forbidden; banned.
5.stance : the way
in which someone stands, especially when deliberately adopted (as in cricket,
golf, and other sports); a person's posture.
6.enormous : very
large in size, quantity, or extent.
7.tinker : attempt
to repair or improve something in a casual or desultory way.
8.ruling : an
authoritative decision or pronouncement, especially one made by a judge.
9.akin : of similar character.
10.pretend :behave
so as to make it appear that something is the case when in fact it is not.
11.admirably :
worthy of admiration; inspiring approval, reverence, or affection.
12.intrinsically
:being an extremely important and basic characteristic of a person or thing.
13.prominent :
important; famous.
13.persistent : continuing firmly or obstinately in an
opinion or course of action in spite of difficulty or opposition.
14.altruistic :
showing a disinterested and selfless concern for the well-being of others;
unselfish.
15.adhering :
believe in and follow the practices of.
16.imply :
indicate the truth or existence of (something) by suggestion rather than explicit
reference.
17.have-nots :
economically disadvantaged people.
18.palatable : (of
an action or proposal) acceptable or satisfactory.
19.distort : give
a misleading or false account or impression of.
20.consequences :
a result or effect, typically one that is unwelcome or unpleasant.
