|
Open
Source Biotechnology: A Drug for Developing Countries' Health
Problems? -- M H M Schellekens
Life
saving drugs are not accessible to a majority of the people
in the developing world. The reasons are twofold: firstly
the drugs are not available; and secondly even if the drugs
are available, they cannot afford them because they are too
expensive. More often the developing countries are neglected
by the pharmaceutical companies as they invest in drugs that
offer them the best prospects for recouping their Research
and Development (R&D) investments, i.e., in developed
countries. Advancement in the area of genomics has brought
in many solutions for various diseases. If genomics is utilized
effectively, to a large extent, the predicament of non-availability
and non-accessibility of drugs can be solved. For this, open
source biotechnology, tailored in the fashion of open source
software, can be utilized. The author, analyses as to whether
open source biotechnology can stimulate drug development,
that is specifically targeted at the health problems of developing
countries.
©
2008 Maurice Schellekens. All Rights Reserved.
New
Governance and Health Care Regulation --
John D Blum
This
paper explores a new approach to health care regulation, referred
to generally as new governance. New governance is not a unitary
theory of law but rather is a collection of approaches to
regulation which lie between an open market system and a very
prescriptive regulatory regime, often characterized as command
and control regulation. Originally developed in Australia,
the various approaches to new governance have been implemented
in Europe and North America as well, generally in highly technical
arenas in matters concerning safety and the environment. The
paper considers the application of new governance in health
care, primarily in the context of medical errors, and considers
application of this doctrine to licensure as well.
©
2007 Asian Journal of WTO and International Health Law and
Policy (AJWH). This article was earlier published in the
Asian Journal of WTO and International Health Law and Policy,
Vol. 2, No. 1 (March). Reprinted with permission.
Minding
Moral Responsibility: The Supreme Court's Recent Mental Health
Rulings -- Steven K Erickson
The
most ongoing areas of controversy in the criminal law involves
questions about mitigation and the insanity defense. These
affirmative defenses flow from our legal and cultural traditions
which hold mens rea as a key component of a just criminal
justice system. Premeditated murder is viewed as a more heinous
act than reckless homicide because our criminal justice system
values mental states for ascribing the severity of guilt.
Yet ascertaining the mental state of defendants remains a
difficult enterprise. Thus, our criminal justice system relies
upon behavioral science experts for guidance in navigating
the opaque world of the mind. In doing so, the behavioral
sciences have been roundly criticized for introducing junk
science into the courtroom. Such criticisms often fail, however,
to account for the fact that the behavioral science experts
are invited into a legal system that views the world very
differently than science. This melding of science and law
is fruitful in some endeavors, but is increasingly leading
science and law down a dangerous path where the legal system
appears willing to easily entertain novel scientific claims
and science has become increasingly politicized by normative
questions. In this brief Essay, I discuss this effect by examining
two recent Supreme Court cases that involved defendants with
very different mental disorders: schizophrenia and psychopathy.
I conclude that both law and science could greatly benefit
from a healthy dose of modesty when considering novel scientific
claims that appear to undermine longstanding notions of individual
responsibility and accountability.
©
2007 Steven K Erickson. This article was originally published
in Engage, Vol. 8, No. 59. Reprinted with permission.
Pharmaceutical-Related
Strategies for Health Care Reform in Canada: Federal Party
Principles, Priorities, and Actions 2004-2006 --
Mayce Al-Sukhni and Peri Ballantyne
The
guiding principle of the Canada Health Act (CHA) is to provide
Canadians with `medically necessary care'. We note the historic
limitations of the CHA with respect to the full integration
of medicines and pharmaceutical health care and point to the
priority given to drugs and pharmacy-related care in 2 recent
federal reports on health care reform. In The Health of
Canadians—The Federal Role (Kirby, 2002) and Building
on Values: The Future of Health Care in Canada and its
related submissions (Romanow, 2002), the role of drugs and
pharmacy in Canadian health care receives unprecedented emphasis.
To determine whether the emphasis on pharmacare made by Kirby,
Romanow, and others is retained in federal-level health reform
planning, we conducted a content analysis of major federal
party platforms and policies tabled for the spring 2004 election
(as well as brief reference to those tabled for the winter
2006 election). Recommended pharmacy-related reforms focus
on potential catastrophic costs to individual patients rather
than on a consideration of essential medicines as medically
necessary for a growing number of Canadians. Furthermore,
little consideration is given to the role pharmacists could
play in minimizing the potential risks of inappropriate drug
use and associated costs. We consider the difficulty of reconciling
the principles of the CHA and the reality of a piecemeal pharmaceutical
health care system. Health reforms are needed that take into
consideration the growing importance of drugs in health care
and the issue of equity and access to drugs for Canadians.
©
2007 Canadian Pharmacists Journal. This paper was earlier
published in the Canadian Pharmacists Journal, Vol.
140, No. 1. Reprinted with permission.
LEGAL
PERSPECTIVES
The
Law and Chronic Disease Prevention: Possibilities and Politics
-- Roger Magnusson and Ruth
Colagiuri
©
2008 The Medical Journal of Australia (MJA). This article
was originally published in The Medical Journal of Australia,
Vol. 188, pp. 104-105. Reprinted with permission.
BOOK
REVIEW
HIV/AIDS:
Health Care & Human Rights Approach --
Anila V Menon
Acquired
Immune Deficiency Syndrome or Acquired Immuno Deficiency Syndrome
(AIDS) is a set of symptoms and infections resulting from
the damage to the human immune system caused by the Human
Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV). HIV/AIDS is the most dreaded
disease in the world currently. More than the physical pain
that the patients undergo, the mental trauma that the patient
and the family undergo is more severe. The disease is such
that the society ostracizes the entire family and they are
treated as animals or even worse. Legal protection coupled
with a human rights approach can only improve the status of
these patients. The book gives a comprehensive picture about
the existing scenario with regard to HIV/AIDS patients across
the world, with special emphasis on South Africa.
©
2008 The Icfai University Press. All Rights Reserved.
|
