Guatemala Debates New Law on Access to Medicines and Health Technology

By Mayora IP

The Guatemalan Congress is currently discussing a new bill aimed at improving access to medicines and health technologies. One of the key elements of the proposed legislation is the prohibition of doctors from prescribing specific commercial drug brands on medical prescriptions.

Instead, the law mandates that doctors will only be allowed to prescribe the active ingredient of a medication, thereby giving patients the freedom to choose which brand they want to purchase at the pharmacy.

The primary goal of this law is to increase transparency in pricing and empower patients to make more informed decisions about their healthcare expenses. By focusing on the active ingredient rather than a brand name, the law hopes to encourage the use of more affordable generic alternatives. This would enable patients to select from a variety of different brands or generic versions available at pharmacies, often leading to significant cost savings.

However, the law sparks concerns among various stakeholders. Pharmaceutical companies have already claimed that the bill infringes on their commercial rights and intellectual property (IP), particularly in relation to trademarks. Pharmaceutical companies argue that brand names are a crucial part of their identity and marketing strategy.

Trademarks not only signify the quality and origin of the product but also serve as a tool for distinguishing between different medications. By removing brand names from prescriptions, the law could affect the healthcare of patients while also undermining the value of trademarks.

Additionally, the law may require substantial changes in medical education and practice. The Guatemalan Medical and Surgical Association (Colegio de Médicos y Cirujanos de Guatemala) has expressed its reservations about the bill. While it agrees that patients should have access to more affordable medications, the association has warned that prescribing only the generic name of a drug might leave the final purchasing decision in the hands of pharmacy workers or patients themselves. This, they argue, could undermine the quality of care and patient safety.

Julio Tejada, the president of the Guatemalan Medical and Surgical Association, further emphasized that the legislation could restrict the professional freedom of doctors to prescribe the most suitable treatment for their patients. He argued that this could break the important doctor-patient relationship, as it places undue pressure on the doctor to adhere to a generic prescription policy rather than considering the individual needs of each patient.

Another point of contention in the law is the issue of penalties. Critics note that the bill’s section on sanctions is unclear, particularly in regard to who would be responsible for sanctioning doctors who do not follow the law's mandate to prescribe only the active ingredients. Under current regulations, the only body authorized to impose such sanctions is the Guatemalan Medical and Surgical Association itself.