Drugs War takes another meaning

January 21, 2006 7:49 AM

A new meaning for Drug War ? It seems that accepting some Free Trade Agreement conditions may become a life or death decision to some people in Thailand. Some Thai People vehemently disagree with that.
posted by elpapacito (14 comments total)

The most recent AIDS mortality numbers in Thailand are shocking: A drop from 6,593 between Jan-Nov 2004 and 1,478 in the same period in 2005. Everyone is crediting the introduction of (near) universal access to HAART (highly-active antiretroviral therapy, the anti-AIDS drug cocktail) made possible by multilateral funds and, most importantly, generic drugs. (Self-link).

Mr. Bush likes to trumpet his PEPFAR inititiative to fund efforts against the pandemic in the developing world. But shit like the Thailand FTA reveal the US gov't's real priorities. Ugh.
posted by docgonzo at 8:04 AM on January 21, 2006

You got anything with some credibility rather than some blog entry?
posted by mischief at 8:29 AM on January 21, 2006

Follow the link.
posted by docgonzo at 8:34 AM on January 21, 2006

directed at elpacacito
posted by mischief at 8:38 AM on January 21, 2006

Is there a reason why there's a space between the last letter of the last word and the question mark? Just curious.
posted by Hildegarde at 8:47 AM on January 21, 2006

Nevermind. I thought this was about the drug war, not aids.
Definitely needs a clearer writeup.
(Still, though, Huffington Post??? C'mon!)
posted by mischief at 8:52 AM on January 21, 2006

Ah. Gotcha.
posted by docgonzo at 9:27 AM on January 21, 2006

mischief: sure, I have the second link. You missed it ?

(Still, though, Huffington Post??? C'mon!)

No really, a snark my mischief ? C'mon !
posted by elpapacito at 10:39 AM on January 21, 2006

What do you hate punctuation, elpapacito?
posted by Hildegarde at 2:32 PM on January 21, 2006

hildegarde: it must be some kind of removed child experience, like some punctuation asshole able to add nothing, but formalistic observation maybe scolded me when I was a kid. From there one I make a point of ridiculing formalistic asshats :)

Whoa what a trip. You guys derailed the thread better then any ParisP attempt.
posted by elpapacito at 2:57 PM on January 21, 2006

The article is about the "other" drug "war", ie a trade war fought by and on behalf of US pharmaceutical companies. That trade war is fought by demanding, sponsoring, and drafting intellectual property legislation such as patent laws, to be passed by the governments of other nations as a condition of trade with the US.
posted by aeschenkarnos at 3:40 PM on January 21, 2006

I don't disagree with what you all are saying here. However, if this were not the case, pharamacuetical companies would not be willing to risk the development costs for a drug that would be efficacious against diseases that affect poorer countries of the world (malaria for instance).
posted by batou_ at 4:26 PM on January 21, 2006

In the above, I did not want to say that "trade war fought by and on behalf of US pharmaceutical companies" is being done is for the good of the world in general, I am just pointing out a potential consequence of not taking such action.
posted by batou_ at 4:41 PM on January 21, 2006

batou, what are you trying to say? That pharmaceutical companies will all of a sudden care about unprofitable diseases that affect poor people once poor countries adopt the IP laws they want? If you believe that, I have a bridge to sell you.
posted by [expletive deleted] at 11:22 PM on January 21, 2006