Consumer And Pharmaceutical Dimensions Of Addressing Bio Terrorism

This article is a comment on the In re Ciprofloxacin Hydrochloride Antitrust Litigation which was filed prior to September 11, 2001, and the decision was rendered with the terrorist attacks still one month in the future. The suit was filed claiming an antitrust violation against Bayer Corporation who is the sole manufacturer of Ciprofloxacin which has led worldwide sale of all antibiotics in the last eight years. It is also the preferred treatment for anthrax infections. Following the terrorist attacks, fear of anthrax attacks led the government to stockpile the drug. The court's decision found that antitrust harm can exist even where a patent is held. The government had options for amassing Cipro aside from entering an agreement with Bayer. This article discusses why those alternatives were not pursued particularly in relation to the United States' patent policies and those under the Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS). Additionally, the article explains how the antitrust litigation formed the background for Bayer's decision to enter an agreement with the government.