India and the Patent Wars: Pharmaceuticals in the New Intellectual Property Regime

[Excerpt] India and the Patent Wars contributes to an international debate over the costs of medicine and restrictions on access under stringent patent laws showing how activists and drug companies in low-income countries seize agency and exert influence over these processes. Murphy Halliburton contributes to analyses of globalization within the fields of anthropology, sociology, law, and public health by drawing on interviews and ethnographic work with pharmaceutical producers in India and the United States. India has been at the center of emerging controversies around patent rights related to pharmaceutical production and local medical knowledge. Halliburton shows that Big Pharma is not all-powerful, and that local activists and practitioners of ayurveda, India’s largest indigenous medical system, have been able to undermine the aspirations of multinational companies and the WTO. Halliburton traces how key drug prices have gone down, not up, in low-income countries under the new patent regime through partnerships between US- and India-based companies, but warns us to be aware of access to essential medicines in low- and middle-income countries going forward

The House of Love and the Mental Hospital: Zones of Care and Recovery in South India

The Movement for Global Mental Health has defined the person suffering psychopathology in low-income countries as an abused and suffering subject in need of saving by biomedical psychiatry. Based on fieldwork in Kerala, South India, carried out at psychiatric clinics and a psychosocial rehabilitation centre, this paper examines patients’ experiences of illness, the degree and quality of family support, and attributions made to the role of ‘sneham’, or love, in recovery. The role of love and family involvement may help explain the provocative finding by WHO epidemiological studies that ‘developing’ countries – and India in particular – showed better rates of recovery from severe mental illness when compared to developed countries

An Iranian Study of Group Acceptance and Commitment Therapy versus Group Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Adolescents with Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder on an Optimal Dose of Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors

Conducted in Iran, participants included 69 adolescents with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) who were on a stable selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) dose and were randomly assigned to one of three conditions: group acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT)+SSRI, group cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT)+SSRI, or continued SSRI treatment. Assessment occurred at pre-, post-treatment, and three-month follow-up and included the Children’s Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale (CY-BOCS), Children’s Depression Inventory (CDI), Avoidance and Fusion Questionnaire for Youth (AFQ-8), Valued Living Questionnaire (VLQ), and Child and Adolescent Mindfulness Measure (CAMM). ACT+SSRI and CBT+SSRI conditions demonstrated significant reductions in OCD severity that were maintained at follow-up compared to the continued SSRI condition. All conditions demonstrated significant reductions in depression that were maintained at follow-up. The ACT+SSRI condition demonstrated significant improvement in psychological flexibility, mindfulness, and valued living that were maintained at follow-up compared to the CBT+SSRI and continued SSRI conditions. Findings indicate that ACT+SSRI is comparably effective as CBT+SSRI at treating adolescent OCD. However, ACT+SSRI appears to differ from CBT+SSRI on changes in psychological flexibility, mindfulness, and valued living, indicating potential differences in mechanism of change

Psychology and aggression

Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/68264/2/10.1177_002200275900300301.pd

2012 ACCF/AHA/ACP/AATS/PCNA/SCAI/STS guideline for the diagnosis and management of patients with stable ischemic heart disease

The recommendations listed in this document are, whenever possible, evidence based. An extensive evidence review was conducted as the document was compiled through December 2008. Repeated literature searches were performed by the guideline development staff and writing committee members as new issues were considered. New clinical trials published in peer-reviewed journals and articles through December 2011 were also reviewed and incorporated when relevant. Furthermore, because of the extended development time period for this guideline, peer review comments indicated that the sections focused on imaging technologies required additional updating, which occurred during 2011. Therefore, the evidence review for the imaging sections includes published literature through December 2011

Hegemony versus Pluralism: Ayurveda and the Movement for Global Mental Health

Under the aegis of the World Health Organization, the Movement for Global Mental Health and an Indian Supreme Court ruling, biomedical psychiatric interventions have expanded in India augmenting biomedical hegemony in a place that is known for its variety of healing modalities. This is occurring despite the fact that studies by the WHO show a better outcome in India for people suffering schizophrenia and related diagnoses when compared to people in developed countries who have greater access to biomedical psychiatry. Practitioners of ayurvedic medicine in Kerala have been mounting a claim for a significant role in public mental health in the face of this growing hegemony. This study examines efforts by ayurvedic practitioners to expand access to ayurvedic mental health services in Kerala, and profiles a rehabilitation center which combines biomedical and ayurvedic therapies and has been a key player in efforts to expand the use of Ayurveda for mental health. The paper argues for maintaining a pluralistic healing environment for treating mental illness rather than displacing other healing modalities in favor of a biomedical psychiatric approach

India and the Patent Wars

India and the Patent Wars examines struggles over patents and access to medicine among pharmaceutical producers, activists and others under a new global intellectual property regime. In the past two decades, intellectual property rights have expanded throughout the globe creating a world in which protections for patents and copyrights have increased and a growing range of knowledge and practices are claimed as property. Driving these changes are U.S. court decisions, the policies of multinational corporations, and the World Trade Organization (WTO). Resistance to this regime has emerged in low-income countries among public health activists concerned about the rising cost of medicines for HIV/AIDS and indigenous peoples who now see their knowledge as vulnerable and pursue ownership claims for their medical and cultural practices

India and the Patent Wars: Pharmaceuticals in the New Intellectual Property Regime

The abstract, table of contents, and first twenty-five pages are published with permission from the Cornell University Press. For ordering information, please visit the Cornell University Press at http://www.cornellpress.cornell.edu/.[Excerpt] India and the Patent Wars contributes to an international debate over the costs of medicine and restrictions on access under stringent patent laws showing how activists and drug companies in low-income countries seize agency and exert influence over these processes. Murphy Halliburton contributes to analyses of globalization within the fields of anthropology, sociology, law, and public health by drawing on interviews and ethnographic work with pharmaceutical producers in India and the United States. India has been at the center of emerging controversies around patent rights related to pharmaceutical production and local medical knowledge. Halliburton shows that Big Pharma is not all-powerful, and that local activists and practitioners of ayurveda, India’s largest indigenous medical system, have been able to undermine the aspirations of multinational companies and the WTO. Halliburton traces how key drug prices have gone down, not up, in low-income countries under the new patent regime through partnerships between US- and India-based companies, but warns us to be aware of access to essential medicines in low- and middle-income countries going forward.Halliburton___India_and_the_Patent_Wars.pdf: 1036 downloads, before Oct. 1, 2020

India and the Patent Wars

India and the Patent Wars examines struggles over patents and access to medicine among pharmaceutical producers, activists and others under a new global intellectual property regime. In the past two decades, intellectual property rights have expanded throughout the globe creating a world in which protections for patents and copyrights have increased and a growing range of knowledge and practices are claimed as property. Driving these changes are U.S. court decisions, the policies of multinational corporations, and the World Trade Organization (WTO). Resistance to this regime has emerged in low-income countries among public health activists concerned about the rising cost of medicines for HIV/AIDS and indigenous peoples who now see their knowledge as vulnerable and pursue ownership claims for their medical and cultural practices