The Generics Act – Finding a Middle Ground for the Good of the Public

We take it for granted now, but back in the 80s and earlier, the brand of medicine that your doctor prescribed you was the one you got. As a patient, you would get the brand that was doc-prescribed – no matter how expensive it was!

In the Philippines, cheaper alternatives existed, but the public really didn’t know any better. Unless you were a doctor, you wouldn’t really know the generic name of the medicine. You had to rely on what brand the doctor was pushing. Even the packaging of the drugs only had the brand name, not the generic name. How would the public know that there were cheaper alternatives, that were as effective?

All this changed with the Generics Act of 1988, or R.A. 6675. Its salient points are as follows:

• All doctors and medical practitioners had to “write prescriptions using the generic name. The brand name may be included if so desired.”
• Pharmaceutical companies “shall indicate prominently the generic name of the product.” The generic name should also appear prominently and immediately above the brand name in all product labels and advertisements. 
• Drug outlets and pharmacies had to inform buyers about other drug products having the same generic name, together with their prices. 

When the Generics Act was passed into law, I was the Program Director of the Pharmaceutical and Healthcare Association of the Philippines (PHAP) – and we were at the forefront of the whole discussion. 

An Issue of Compromise

The association was composed of multinational and local pharma companies; hence, they had the most at stake with this new law. They invested millions into their brands, and with this new law, the whole game was about to change. 

I was in the middle of everything. My role was, on one hand, present to the government the view of the pharma industry, and on the other, present to the pharma industry executives in the association that the status quo was changing. 

There was, understandably, great pushback from the pharma industry execs. 

They didn’t like the initial version of the law, which was too biased towards generics – they initially wanted to remove brand names completely, and just display generic names in packages. Of course the pharma companies wouldn’t agree with this. 

However, on the other hand, the public should be given the option of cheaper alternatives, so the practice of prescribing only branded medicines should cease. 

In order for this to work, there had to be a compromise.

A Delicate Balancing Act

The challenge back then was to find a middle ground. My primary task was to write position papers and present to all sides the opposing viewpoint, with the end goal of coming up with the final version of the law that is acceptable to all parties. 

I presented to the pharma executives what the government wanted, and what my opinions and recommendations were – which parts I think would work, which parts are too much, and finally, which parts we had no choice but to accept.

Sometimes, they would see me as a villain; but I think they understood that it was part of my job. I had to present the viewpoint of the government in order for them to understand where the legislation was coming from. 

On the other hand, I had to equip the pharma executives with the knowledge on how best to approach the situation when discussing their position with the government. The process of taking a drug into the market takes years, and they invested a lot into research and development, so they had all the right to profit off of that. 

For the Good of the People

As with all things, there had to be balance. The greatest achievement during my six months with PHAP is that I helped navigate the issue and helped all parties reach a resolution. It may not necessarily be fully acceptable to everybody, but at least it’s something that everyone can live with. 

What’s important is that the Filipino people would be given a choice. I think overall, the Generics Act was largely positive. It forced pharma companies to change their strategy. The focus now is no longer on who has the best brand, but who has the best manufacturing practice. 

Eventually, the big pharma companies came out with generics of their own, so I think the Generics Act wasn’t really that big of a loss for them. In fact, the people who can afford it still opt to purchase branded medicines over generics. What’s changed is that those who couldn’t afford it were informed of the cheaper alternatives. That was the first step to accessible healthcare for all.