Quite simply, this student is bad news. Hopefully he'll get thrown out and return here where he should do some hard labour (such as rice harvesting in Isaan or manual labour on a construction site), which would teach him what kind of privileges he just goofed up.

But instead, his flabbergasted Khun Mae will fix him a seat as a lecturer at a local university to complete his Thai PhD. God bless the students attending his readings. Unfortunately this proves once again that the Thai education system favours money, influence and/or family name. We will continue to see spoiled brats with an IQ below shoe-size taking up seats that should go to the more gifted but unfortunately financially restricted students. It is unfair and has been proven counterproductive to the human-resources pool in Thailand.

This newspaper should write about overdue reforms of the education system and forget about this individual, who is not worth the ink. Why is education directly linked to cash that ultimately gets spent overseas? Thailand could do much better. Arguably an educated electorate is more difficult - if not impossible - to govern Thai-style, and would be a remedy for all those diseases that result in Thailand losing out in the long run.

Sydebolle

Bangkok

--------------------------------------

Thai 'infringements' a case of thinly veiled greed at work

Re: "New drug war throws up innocent casualties", Opinion, May 9.

I have been living in Thailand for many years, and I feel the initiative of the Thai government is illegal from an international point of view - infringement of patents is unacceptable.

The primary motivation of the Thai people in this story is, as is often the case, simply greed. They want to get for a cheap price something they could afford, but that they are too stingy and/or selfish to pay for at the right price. It is totally disgusting to play with people's feelings and to disguise greed as the wealthy gathering in solidarity with the poor, but this is quite common in Thailand.

On the one hand, the Thai government argues that Thailand is too poor a country to afford medicine for the needy. On the other, we learn that the Revenue Department forgot to claim millions of dollars in taxes of the family of the former, ousted prime minister.

Not only is this government serving partisan interests, not only is it bringing down the Thai economy (when that happens the first victims will again be the needy), but on top of that, this government is backing an illegal action. What credibility is left for such a government?

Marc-Phillippe

Bangkok

------------------------------------

Citizens of other countries not as wealthy as Americans

Re: "Long-term effects of flouting patents need consideration", Letters, May 10.

What has occurred in the United States medical community is in no way related to what is occurring in the remainder of the world's medical communities.

When I lived in the US, I was diagnosed with a pre-glaucoma condition. I was told that so long as I used eye drops daily to contain the condition, I would be okay. In order to obtain the eye drops, it was necessary to visit a doctor, get a prescription and then purchase the eye drops. The cost of the eye drops was approximately US$70 (Bt2,420). It would have been necessary to replace the drops about every three months.

In Thailand I can buy an equivalent drug for about $8 without a prescription.

The point of relating this story is to point out that the cost and conduct of medical care and medicines in the United States has spiralled to a point where it is in no relation to what is going on in the remainder of the world.

US drug companies are not the only entities in the world doing medical research, but it would seem that if they invent a given medicine the remainder of the world is expected to live by the cost of living in America.

What this debate gets down to is not whether anyone should make a profit, but exactly how much that profit should be. Obviously, the drug company that manufactures the drug for my eyes that I purchase in Thailand is making a profit. And they seem to be making it at about one-ninth of what American drug companies and retail outlets are able to do. How can this be?

What this situation requires is an understanding by Americans of what is going on in the remainder of the world. Because they have been inflicted with medical costs that even they are having trouble affording, they feel that everyone, including countries where the average income is about a tenth of what theirs is, should just live with it.

It would seem to be unrealistic to even continue to have world-wide patent laws covering life-saving drugs.

If this were to happen, would American drug companies cease to do research in these areas? I think not. The reason being that with a population of three hundred million who have already learned to live with the gouging they are getting from the American medical community, it would still be profitable to do the research.

John Arnone

Yasothon

--------------------------------------

Oxfam objects to USA for Innovation ad in 'The Nation'

As an organisation committed to advancing the cause of affordable medicines across the developing world, we feel compelled to voice our rejection to the recent ad published in The Nation on May 10 by USA for Innovation on page 7A entitled "The Wrong Prescription for Thailand".

Unfortunately, the organisation that placed the ad serves nothing but the agenda of the global pharmaceutical industry and not the interests of the people in Thailand.

We strongly disagree and are disappointed with The Nation's decision to publish the full-page advertisement. Information in the advertisement is wrong, misleading and threatens the integrity of the healthcare system for Thai people as a whole.

Hundreds of thousands of people in Thailand make great sacrifices to buy the medicines needed for themselves and their families. Thus affordable generic medicines are important to keep down prices. To do this Thailand has been innovative enough to issue compulsory licences for life-saving medicines and for this the leadership here should be applauded rather than criticised.

We hope that The Nation will use the money received from this advertisement to help local charitable organisations raise awareness on the issue and buy life-saving HIV medication for people in need. This would be the right prescription for The Nation.

Yowalak Thiarachow

Programme Manager for Thailand and Regional Initiatives

Oxfam Great Britain

Bangkok

------------------------------------

Advertisement pushes agenda of 'extremist lobbying group'

One would hope that the full-page advertisement by USA for Innovation was an April fools' joke just a few weeks too late? The misinformation and lies being promulgated by this organisation need to put into context with the day's headlines, where former US president Bill Clinton backs Thailand as HIV drug deals are signed. Surely the Thai advertising standards board should raise alarm bells over false and misleading advertising, and editorial staff should review their policies on the inclusion of such inflammatory advertisements? USA for Innovation's statements have become more and more ludicrous over time and bear no resemblance to fact. They are simply an extremist lobbying firm paid by pharmaceutical giants who are more interested in profits than people's right to health.

Full credit to Public Health Minister Mongkol na Songkhla and the interim Thai government for their leadership and determination in pushing for compulsory licences for life-prolonging second-line HIV/Aids medications.

The truth: Thailand's patients already have access to the world's best medicines and a farsighted government has ensured that the public health system is sustainable by utilising quality generics were possible. The recent compulsory licences have increased access to essential medicines for Thai people living with HIV and Aids and those with heart disease. The Thai government is not refusing US medical technology as stated. Rather it is being denied them by US pharmaceutical company Abbott by the withdrawal of all their medications awaiting registration in Thailand and their refusal to register any more.

The truth: generic drugs are just as effective as branded drugs and pharmacologically identical or they would not receive approval by the Food and Drug Administration.

The truth: Thai produced Government Pharmaceutical Organisation drugs (GPO) are already being fast-tracked for pre-qualification by the World Health Organisation and have been used for years with great effect. The claims of increased drug resistance in a Mahidol study are completely false and fail to understand what the study was actually measuring. Drug resistance to GPO drugs is only around 10 per cent, which is considered the universal norm.

The truth: Thailand has one of the best public health policies and access to treatment in the Asia-Pacific region in relation to HIV/Aids treatment, prevention care and support.

The latest downgrading of Thailand to a priority-watch list by the United States Trade Representative (USTR) is merely a reflection of the undue pressure and influence that pharmaceutical companies have on the USTR and US trade policy. Thailand has broken no World Trade Organisation rules by issuing compulsory licences, they have merely utilised the flexibility granted them in the TRIPS agreement designed to increase access to essential medicines for developing countries.

In order to address the HIV/Aids public-health issue on a global scale it is imperative that public-health rights take precedence over pharmaceutical patents. We call for the review and reform of TRIPS rules and support the use of flexibility within TRIPS to promote greater generic manufacturing. We also seek improved access to affordable second-line drugs and investment in the development and provision of paediatric formulations for children.

Greg Gray

The International Treatment

Preparedness Coalition

Bangkok