The United States is now serving a three-year term on the World Health Organization (WHO)’s Executive Board, a key decision-making body that guides the WHO’s work on global health. Alongside thirty-three other countries on the Executive Board, The U.S, will attend the 144th session of the Executive Board in January 2019 to discuss topics ranging from polio eradication to the health implications of climate change.

But perhaps the most important topic on the Executive Board’s agenda is the WHO’s proposed Roadmap on Access to Medicines. This Roadmap sets priorities for the next five years of the WHO’s work on medicines around the world. As an Executive Board member, The United States will help shape the discussion about how the WHO should approach this issue.

Unfortunately, the WHO’s Roadmap, as proposed by the WHO’s Secretariat, has serious problems that Member States need to fix. For example, the Roadmap envisions an expanded WHO role in advising countries on intellectual property issues, such as the use of “compulsory licenses” (sometimes called “TRIPS flexibilities”) to allow the manufacture of patented medicines without the patent owners’ consent. This is unnecessary and would gravely harm global innovation – making it harder for patients to access today’s medicines and undermining investment in tomorrow’s new treatments and cures.

The WHO’s Roadmap reflects a tendency at the WHO to see patents as a barrier to access.  But this isn’t true: research has found no correlation between intellectual property and access to medicines.  Nearly all the drugs the WHO deems “essential” are already off-patent yet still out of reach for millions due to other factors, such as weak and underfunded health care systems.  Strengthening IP can actually facilitate access, both by stimulating new discoveries and making it easier for innovative medicines to reach patients that need them.  

The WHO is also ill-suited to make these recommendations: it lacks the expertise to advise countries on the complex technical, economic and trade implications of intellectual property (IP) protections. Many countries have already raised concerns that the WHO should not spend its limited resources working on such polarizing tasks that are unlikely to improve access to medicines.

WHO Executive Board members need to step up—and speak out—about the vital role of IP in spurring new discoveries. During both Republican and Democratic administrations in the past, the United States has been among the most outspoken defenders of biomedical research and development. This doesn’t come as a surprise considering the country has long been the global leader in innovation. 

Innovation, spurred by IP protections, has driven the U.S. economy for generations.  IP is even more important today.  Take the U.S. patent figures, for example. According to the most recent figures, the U.S. Patent and Trade Office received 6,411 patent applications for biopharmaceutical innovations—a patent application rate higher than that of any other country. Moreover, the United States also leads in the amount of money it invests in research and development, which totaled $511 billion in 2016—$90 billion of which can be attributed to the biopharmaceutical industry. And, IP-intensive sectors account for 27.9 million American jobs.

Statements made by the United States in recent international meetings show that American leaders are aware of the importance of a strong innovation economy—not just for their country’s own development but for the prosperity of the world. In just the last year, U.S. officials have demonstrated a deep commitment to furthering innovation so patients around the world can access today’s treatments and tomorrow’s cures:

• At the May 2018 World Health Assembly, the U.S. delegation advocated for action that adequately recognizes the critical role innovation plays in addressing our greatest global health challenges, and underscored the harmful burden that inappropriate use of compulsory licensing places on the countries funding novel research and bringing medical breakthroughs to market.
• In written comments submitted last summer on a previous draft of the Roadmap on Access to Medicines, the United States recognized the need for the development of new therapies to meet global unmet need and cautioned against taking action that could “limit our ability to advance R&D for therapeutics and other antimicrobial products in a way that encourages innovation and novel approaches,” and warned that the WHO should be “extremely cautious when considering work on IP issues.”
• Most recently, during a convening of the World Trade Organization (WTO) Council on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS), U.S. WTO Ambassador Shea noted that adequately protecting and promoting intellectual property “not only fosters new business, but it creates new jobs and leads to higher wages,” and cited IP as “an integral part of our local American innovative economy” and critical to “the economic growth of the global economy, improving lives and society as whole.”

As WHO Executive Board considers how to improve access to medicines, the United States has an opportunity to rebut the idea that weakening IP will do anything to improve access. As a global health leader and major funder of development assistance, U.S. officials can help focus the WHO on tackling the real barriers to access, such as weak and under-funded health care systems, poor infrastructure and taxes/tariffs. In particular, the United States should speak out clearly at the Executive Board meeting to convey concerns about the Roadmap and ensure it does not lead to expanded WHO activities that would undermine IP globally.

Now’s the time to act. Patients around the world depend on the United States and the other Executive Board members to lead the charge on proactive and comprehensive solutions that address the real and complex obstacles to better global health.