These pharmaceutical companies have allowed children to die because of corporate profiteering

In the world’s poorest countries, it is now 68 times more expensive to vaccinate a child than it was in 2001

Kate Elder
Thursday 03 December 2015 11:39
Comments
GSK and Pfizer dominate the pneumonia vaccine market
GSK and Pfizer dominate the pneumonia vaccine market

Pneumonia is a killer disease that causes the deaths of one million children every year, even though we have the medicine to immunise against it. Both Pfizer and GlaxoSmithKline sell an effective vaccine but many countries are unable to introduce the vaccine because of the price. Children’s lives are being lost because of corporate profiteering.

Why is the price of the pneumonia vaccine so expensive? Because the market is controlled by just two drug companies. Pfizer has by far the largest market share, having made a whopping US$25 billion in sales from the pneumonia vaccine since 2009; UK-based GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) has made US$3.3 billion over the same period.

There is a global alliance on vaccinations, Gavi, that has the ambition to create equal access to vaccines for children living in the world’s poorest countries. Britain is the biggest donor to Gavi having donated more than US$2 billion over the past 5 years. Through Gavi, more than 500 million children have been vaccinated around the world over the past 15 years. Yet, despite this, many millions of children are still dying from diseases that could be prevented.

Governments from around the world are meeting today in Geneva to assess progress. In the world’s poorest countries, it is now 68 times more expensive to vaccinate a child than it was in 2001. Gavi is currently charged US$10 per child for the pneumonia vaccine and pays a subsidy to the companies on top of this - this price accounts for almost half the cost of childhood vaccinations. Going forward, the overpriced vaccine will absorb 30 percent of Gavi’s budget over the next four years.

We hope that price negotiations sit at the top of their agenda. We are hopeful that in today's meeting we will see the British government help Gavi to do a better job negotiating with Pfizer and GSK for more significant price reductions. Especially as despite the massive profits already made from it, the companies have reduced the price in negotiations over the past six years by just three percent (GSK) and six percent (Pfizer). We have made progress in the past, so we hope more can be done today.

Imagine how much further our donation to Gavi could go if Pfizer and GSK offered a substantial discount. The drug companies can and should be selling the pneumonia vaccine for no more than US$5 per child.

Gavi could also help break Pfizer and GSK’s duopoly by supporting other manufacturers to enter the market more quickly. A producer in India, the Serum Institute, has already publicly stated that it will charge US$6 per child for the vaccine on bringing it to the market in several years’ time – and it will still be making a profit.

Today’s meeting represents a golden opportunity for those who work in disease prevention to stand up against pharmaceutical giants.

Kate Elder is the Vaccines Policy Advisor for Medecins Sans Frontieres

Pfizer has said that it sells the pneumonia vaccine for a tenth of what it does to some developed nations to developing countries in a previous statement sent to MSF protests over costs. Pfizer spokeswoman Sally Beatty said to Al Jazeera said the company works with charities regularly to reduce the rates of vaccine costs, and pointed out that medical prices vary depending on factors such as the local healthcare systems. Pfizer also pointed out that it works with UNICEF in the distribution of vaccines which are provided by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

GlaxoSmithKline said in an earlier statement that their vaccine for pneumonia is “one of the most complex we’ve ever manufactured, essentially combining 10 vaccines in one”. They pointed out that, “For Gavi-eligible countries, we are providing this vaccine at a deeply discounted price. At this level, we are able to just cover our costs. To discount it further would threaten our ability to supply it to these countries in the long-term."

Register for free to continue reading

Registration is a free and easy way to support our truly independent journalism

By registering, you will also enjoy limited access to Premium articles, exclusive newsletters, commenting, and virtual events with our leading journalists

Please enter a valid email
Please enter a valid email
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Please enter your first name
Special characters aren’t allowed
Please enter a name between 1 and 40 characters
Please enter your last name
Special characters aren’t allowed
Please enter a name between 1 and 40 characters
You must be over 18 years old to register
You must be over 18 years old to register
Opt-out-policy
You can opt-out at any time by signing in to your account to manage your preferences. Each email has a link to unsubscribe.

Already have an account? sign in

By clicking ‘Register’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Join our new commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged in