, Volume 6, Issue 1, pp 1–9 | Cite as

The global health complex

  • Linsey McGoey
  • Julian Reiss
  • Ayo Wahlberg
Editors' Introduction

In February 2009, Andrew Witty, the Chief Executive of GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) announced that GSK would slash the prices of its medicines in low-income countries, and, more surprisingly, raised the idea of a patent pool, where holders of intellectual property rights would share discoveries in order to stimulate neglected diseases research (Lancet, 2009; McNeil, 2010). The announcement generated cautious praise from non-governmental organizations (NGOs) such as the Médicins Sans Frontières (MSF) and the Drugs for Neglected Diseases Initiative, the latter suggesting that GSK has emerged as the ‘most innovative’ pharmaceutical company to tackle the persistent problem of how to encourage the private sector to pour R&D funding into diseases that have little market value, as most sufferers are unable to afford the cost of treatments.

Staff at MSF welcomed the announcement – but stressed a number of problems. First, GSK refused to endorse the possibility of pooling patents for HIV drugs, still...



This special issue emerged from a two-day symposium on ‘The Ethics and Politics of Neglected Disease Research,’ on 8–9 December 2008, funded and hosted by the Brocher Foundation in Geneva. The guest editors would like to thank the Brocher Foundation, and the Editorial Board of BioSocieties, for their support.


  1. Benatar, S. (2009) Global health: Where to now? Global Health Governance 2: Online publication
  2. Biehl, J. (2007) Pharmaceuticalization: AIDS treatment and global health politics. Anthropological Quarterly 4: 1083–1126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Birn, A.-E. (2005) Gates's grandest challenge: Transcending technology as public health ideology. Lancet, 366: 1357–1358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brenner, R. (1998) The economics of global turbulence: A special report on the world economy, 1950–98. New Left Review 229 (May/June): 1–261.Google Scholar
  5. Buse, K. and Harmer, A. (2004) Power to the partners? The Politics of Public-Private Health Partnerships Development 47 (2): 49–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. (2010) Paxil Japanese post marketing paediatric study in depression (double-blind, placebo controlled study),, accessed 17 November 2010.
  7. Correa, C. (2006) Implications of bilateral free trade agreements on access to medicines. Bulletin of the World Health Organization 84 (5): 399–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cooper, M. (2008) Life as Surplus: Biotechnology and Capitalism in the Neoliberal Era. Seattle, London: University of Washington Press.Google Scholar
  9. Ecks, S. (2008) Global pharmaceutical markets and corporate citizenship: The case of Novartis’ anti-cancer drug Glivec. BioSocieties 3: 165–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Edwards, J. (2010) Glaxo is testing Paxil on 7-year-olds despite well known suicide risks. BNET, 21 May
  11. Fidler, D. (2008) After the revolution: Global health politics in a time of economic crisis and threatening future trends. Global Health Governance 2 (Fall 2008/Spring 2009),
  12. Hollis, A. and Pogge, T. (2008) The Health Impact Fund: Making New Medicines Accessible for All. Incentives for Global Health, http://www.incentivesforglobalhealth.orgGoogle Scholar
  13. Kickbusch, I. (2006) Mapping the future of public health: Action on global health. Canadian Journal of Public Health 97: 6–8.Google Scholar
  14. Lakoff, A. (2010) Two regimes of global health. Humanity: An International Journal of Human Rights, Humanitarianism, and Development 1 (1): 59–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lakoff, A. and Collier, S. (eds.) (2008) Biosecurity Interventions: Global Health and Security in Question. New York: Columbia University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lancet. (2009) Editorial: Pharmaceuticals, patents, publicity ... and philanthropy? Lancet 373: 693.Google Scholar
  17. Lee, K., Buse, K. and Fustukian, S. eds. (2002) Health Policy in a Globalising World. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Lexchin, J. (2010) One step forward, one step sideways? Expanding research capacity of neglected diseases. BMC International Health and Human Rights, 10,
  19. Mahajan, M. (2008) Designing epidemics: Models, policy-making, and global foreknowledge in India's AIDS epidemic. Science and Public Policy 35: 585–596.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Mauss, M. (1990) The Gift: The Form and Reason for Exchange in Archaic Societies. New York/London: W.W. Norton.Google Scholar
  21. McCoy, D., Kembhavi, G., Patel, J. and Luintel, A. (2009) Global health funding: How much, where it comes from, and where it goes. Health Policy and Planning 24 (6): 407–417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. McGoey, L. and Jackson, E. (2009) Seroxat and the suppression of trial data: Regulatory failure and the uses of legal ambiguity. Journal of Medical Ethics 36 (2): 107–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. McNeil, D. (2010) Ally for the poor in an unlikely corner. New York Times, 9 February.Google Scholar
  24. Mosse, D. and Lewis, D. (2005) The Aid Effect: Giving and Governing in International Development. London: Pluto Press.Google Scholar
  25. Peterson, K. (2001) Benefit sharing for all? Bioprospecting NGOs, intellectual property rights, new governmentalities. Polar 24: 78–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Pharmaceutical R&D Policy Project. (2005) The New Landscape of Neglected Disease Drug Development. London: London School of Economics/Wellcome Trust.Google Scholar
  27. Pogge, T. (2005) Human rights and global health: A research program. Metaphilosophy 36 (1/2): 182–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Redfield, P. (2008) Doctors without borders and the moral economy of pharmaceuticals. In: A. Bullard (ed.) Human Rights in Crisis. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  29. Reiss, J. and Kitcher, P. (2009) Biomedical research, neglected diseases, and well-ordered science. Theoria 24 (3): 263–282.Google Scholar
  30. Schumpeter, J. (1976 1942) Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy. New York: HarperPerenniel.Google Scholar
  31. Sridhar, D. and Batniji, R. (2008) Misfinancing global health: The case for transparency in disbursements and decision-making. Lancet 372: 1185–1191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Sridhar, D. (2009) Global health: WHO can lead. World Today (Chatham House magazine), February.Google Scholar
  33. Taylor, L. (2010) German pharma price cut plans move closer Pharma Times. Pharma Times 15 November.

Copyright information

© The London School of Economics and Political Science 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Linsey McGoey
    • 1
  • Julian Reiss
    • 2
  • Ayo Wahlberg
    • 3
  1. 1.University of EssexColchesterUnited Kingdom
  2. 2.Erasmus University RotterdamRotterdamthe Netherlands
  3. 3.Department of AnthropologyUniversity of CopenhagenKøbenham KDenmark

Personalised recommendations