[GA - PASSED] Access to Effective Medications

Status
Not open for further replies.
Hulldom

Hulldom

Winter Kingdom
Pronouns
He/Him/His
TNP Nation
Hulldom
Discord
seathestarlesssky
ga.jpg

Access to Effective Medications
Category: Health | Area of Effect: Healthcare
Proposed by: Xanthorrhoea, Co-authored by: Tinhampton | Onsite Topic​

The General Assembly:
Recognising the numerous social, humanitarian and economic benefits of a healthy, happy populace, and the importance of access to effective medication in maintaining this health and happiness;
Recalling the efforts of resolutions such as GA 41 Access to Life-Saving Drugs, GA 333 Preserving Antimicrobials, GA 429 Traditional Medicine, and GA 571 Access to Transgender Hormone Therapy to improve access to safe and effective medication worldwide;
Noting, despite these efforts, the ongoing disproportionate distribution of access to effective medications between nations, and between peoples within nations, including the significant impact of poverty and income inequality on this access, and noting the lack of a globally accepted standard of medical treatment;
Seeking to reaffirm and strengthen its commitment to improving the health of all peoples, regardless of World Assembly (WA) membership status, hereby enacts the following:
  1. The World Medications Council (henceforth the WMC) is established as a branch of the World Health Authority, with the purpose of improving access to safe, efficacious, and cost-effective medications in all nations. The WMC shall have the following duties:
    1. To assess and record the safety, efficacy, and cost-effectiveness of all known medications, defined as any substance used to diagnose, prevent, treat, or manage the symptoms of disease, medical and/or psychological conditions (including for the purposes of disinfection, immunisation, contraception, abortion, hormone therapy, and euthanasia). In assessing a medication, the WMC must consider:
      1. A medication’s safety, including the severity and frequency of known adverse effects, the therapeutic range, toxicity, interactions with other medications, and requirements for that medication's safe storage, handling, and administration;

      2. The impact of patient factors on a medication’s safety, including species, pregnancy, intercurrent medical and/or psychological conditions, employment, and lifestyle factors;

      3. A medication’s efficacy for all clinical indications for which it is used, including the magnitude of effect, whether a medication is curative or requires ongoing use, the therapeutic dose, frequency of dosing, duration of therapy, and synergistic or adverse effects when used with other medications;

      4. A medication’s relative cost-effectiveness, including the medication's price, total cost of therapy, costs associated with storage, handling and transport, staff training and safety protocols required for its use, and relative cost and efficacy compared to other available medications used for the same or similar purposes; and

      5. Any other factors it deems relevant.
    2. To, based on this assessment, create and maintain an Effective Medications List (henceforth the EML), containing those medications that are best suited to meet the needs of an effective health system.

    3. To regularly assess and update the EML based upon the current scientific consensus.

    4. To undertake activities to promote access to medications on the EML in all WA member nations (henceforth members).

    5. To promote access to medications on the EML in non-WA member nations, with the consent of and according to the laws of those nations.
  2. All members must provide access to all medications included in the EML to all residents of their nation, unless one of the following exceptions applies. Nations are not required to provide access to a medication:
    1. That is illegal, or for purposes that are illegal in that nation, for all of their residents;

    2. For purposes other than the diagnosis, prevention, treatment, or management of disease, medical and/or psychological conditions for which that medication has an established clinical use; or

    3. That they cannot provide access to for reasons outside their control. In this case, they must provide access to an available similarly effective alternative, and provide access to the unavailable medication as soon as possible.
  3. Members must ensure that medications are priced in a way that allows all residents to afford all the medications they require while maintaining an adequate standard of living.

  4. Members are encouraged to minimise the cost of medications to patients through all appropriate means, including subsidising common and/or effective medications, standardising prices, enforcing strong anti-trust legislation, and creating special access schemes for vulnerable and disadvantaged groups.

Co-authored by Tinhampton
Click to expand...
Note: Only votes from TNP WA nations and NPA personnel will be counted. If you do not meet these requirements, please add (non-WA) or something of that effect to your vote.
Voting Instructions:
  • Vote For if you want the Delegate to vote For the resolution.
  • Vote Against if you want the Delegate to vote Against the resolution.
  • Vote Abstain if you want the Delegate to abstain from voting on this resolution.
  • Vote Present if you are personally abstaining from this vote.
Detailed opinions with your vote are appreciated and encouraged!

ForAgainstAbstainPresent
71110
"Access to Effective Medications" has passed 8,639 votes (54.9%) to 7,096 (45.1%).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
IFV
Overview
This resolution seeks to ensure that residents of all World Assembly member states have access to safe and effective medicine. To do this, the authors not only create the Effective Medications List (EML), a list of medicines recognized to "meet the needs of an effective healthcare system". The authors then require that residents require that, when applicable, member states provide access to EML medications to persons requiring them with some mandates relating to protecting patient health and safety. Finally, this resolution mandates that member states ensure that EML medications are accessible cost-wise to residents and that they undertake further efforts to minimize medication costs in the future.

Recommendation
Our main problem with this resolution comes in two main thrusts. The first is the mandate of the EML in 1(a) to assess "all known medications" a process that, quite literally, could render the creation of this list not just impracticable but also damaging to global public health goals. There being no method for us to ascertain which medicines could or would be first to be assessed, it is hard for us to say that looking at all known medications is a good thing. Further, there is the issue with the mandate in 2(a) where, for instance, a state seeking to combat all forms of drug dependence and addiction could simply ban most forms of medication and render the provision in clause 2 moot since states can ban the use of medications which are "illegal in that nation".

For the above reasons, the Ministry of World Assembly Affairs recommends a vote Against the General Assembly Resolution at vote, "Access to Effective Medications".
Our Voting Recommendation Dispatch--Please Upvote!
 
Last edited:
Against. I have consistently voted against providing socialized free health care and I recall I voted against GA #571 on exactly the same grounds.

To add: if Tinhampton complains, my personal position is that the NHS in the UK should be liberalized in favour of a massive tax cut plus health insurance.
 
Last edited:
simone_republic:
Against. I have consistently voted against providing socialized free health care and I recall I voted against GA #571 on exactly the same grounds.

To add: if Tinhampton complains, my personal position is that the NHS in the UK should be liberalized in favour of a massive tax cut plus health insurance.
Click to expand...
Because that’s such an effective way to provide care to people who can’t afford it :eyeroll:
 
Comfed:
Because that’s such an effective way to provide care to people who can’t afford it :eyeroll:
Click to expand...
My view is that provide care to people who can't afford it is a form of welfare and that is a decision up to each jurisdiction. I'd stop here otherwise this turns into Facebook/Twitter/Fox/CNN what not.
 
simone_republic:
My view is that provide care to people who can't afford it is a form of welfare and that is a decision up to each jurisdiction. I'd stop here otherwise this turns into Facebook/Twitter/Fox/CNN what not.
Click to expand...
And what exactly is wrong with welfare? I concur with Tinhampton here; you started the debate.
 
The loophole here, by the way, is just to declare that a medicine on the EML is illegal. Also, even given traditional aphrodisiacs and other traditional medicines, hard for me to see how we could ever catalogue "all medicines". Against [Non-WA].
 
Greater Cesnica:
And what exactly is wrong with welfare? I concur with Tinhampton here; you started the debate.
Click to expand...
I am trying to avoid starting a debate here, I just want to give a brief rationale on why I am voting this way and move on. Otherwise we can spend the rest of our lives debating (in Parliament, Congress, or wherever you live) on the merits of a particular policy.
 
simone_republic:
In my view, this boils down to (to condense from decades of research and 17 years of Facebook wars) two words: welfare dependancy.
Click to expand...
Welfare dependency is a buzzterm employed by the ultra-rich to obfuscate the fact that their corporations get handouts and tax breaks at the expense of the working and middle classes.
 
Greater Cesnica:
Welfare dependency is a buzzterm employed by the ultra-rich to obfuscate the fact that their corporations get handouts and tax breaks at the expense of the working and middle classes.
Click to expand...
Given that is essentially a woke left wing AOC liberal talking point, can I post one from the Club for Growth? Americans for Tax Reform? There's no equivalent for Australia, but for New Zealanders, any interest for ACT New Zealand political party's platform?
 
Last edited:
Greater Cesnica:
And what exactly is wrong with welfare? I concur with Tinhampton here; you started the debate.
Click to expand...
Look at the example of Britain (since I recall Tinhampton is British) under the great statesman Margaret Thatcher who (amongst her numerous other outstanding achievements) restored British competitiveness, reduced employment and leaving social security as a last resort for the very poorest minority (or those with various misfortunes), and making it irrelevant to those on middle and high incomes, who would choose private provision instead.
 
simone_republic:
Given that is essentially a woke left wing AOC liberal talking point, can I post one from the Club for Growth? Americans for Tax Reform? There's no equivalent for Australia, but for New Zealanders, any interest for ACT New Zealand political party's platform?
Click to expand...
>Left wing
>liberal
these two are not the same thing lmao
simone_republic:
Look at the example of Britain (since I recall Tinhampton is British) under the great statesman Margaret Thatcher who (amongst her numerous other outstanding achievements) restored British competitiveness, reduced employment and leaving social security as a last resort for the very poorest minority (or those with various misfortunes), and making it irrelevant to those on middle and high incomes, who would choose private provision instead.
Click to expand...
You left out Thatcher's death squads, her decimation of the working class, and her fanatic zeal to sell out the collective assets of the British people to wealthy, foreign interests.
 
Last edited:
Greater Cesnica:
>Left wing
>liberal
these two are not the same thing lmao

You left out Thatcher's death squads, her decimation of the working class, and her fanatic zeal to sell out the collective assets of the British people to wealthy, foreign interests.
Click to expand...

Greater Cesnica:
>Left wing
>liberal
these two are not the same thing lmao

You left out Thatcher's death squads, her decimation of the working class, and her fanatic zeal to sell out the collective assets of the British people to wealthy, foreign interests.
Click to expand...
I am not asking you to agree with me. I am just stating my position that I strongly admire Lady Thatcher.
 
Greater Cesnica:
>Left wing
>liberal
these two are not the same thing lmao

You left out Thatcher's death squads, her decimation of the working class, and her fanatic zeal to sell out the collective assets of the British people to wealthy, foreign interests.
Click to expand...
Sorry I used the word "liberal" in the American sense, I know the definition can be the entire opposite depending on jurisdiction or even depending on one's political situation.
 
St George:
Thatcher was horrific for vast swathes of the UK and left entire communities to rot in poverty. Your take on Thatcherism is highly one-sided and not at all accurate.
Click to expand...
I completely disagree with your view, but since this is an issue that has been debated for thirty years and probably will be debated for the next three hundred, I think I do not want to further comment.
 
Greater Cesnica:
>Left wing
>liberal
these two are not the same thing lmao

You left out Thatcher's death squads, her decimation of the working class, and her fanatic zeal to sell out the collective assets of the British people to wealthy, foreign interests.
Click to expand...
I believe the working class was liberated with reduced regulation, the right to work, and British services were considerably improved (BT, London bus services). If you are referring to Northern Ireland, I believe that's too emotional an issue for me to remotely offer an informed comment.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top