countries of the Nordic region should work together on, as well as work together within the EU, the United Nations and the World Health Organisation,” he explains. “But in terms of antibiotic use, I believe the five Nordic countries should make clear their intentions together and show the world that they will diminish their use, at least to the lowest level in Europe, which is the Netherlands. “The situation now is that all Nordic countries use
less antibiotics than the average for the EU but I think it is important that we lower this use further. I think it will then become easier for other countries who have very high levels of antibiotic use, like France and Belgium, for example, to lower their use if we reach the lowest level with about five years. “The other part of this proposal is that we should
commit to developing new antibiotics,” he continues. “I was really frightened when I heard that there have been no new classes of antibiotics developed since the 1980s. Many of the experts I spoke with in compiling my report believe that the economic incentives for developing these new drugs to be too small to make it worthwhile. So I propose that some £10billion should be put aside by the rich countries – the EU, the US, Japan and the like – to incentivise the pharmaceutical companies to develop new antibiotics. If they do, we will have the money earmarked to make it pay. “National governments will fund these initiatives,
which sounds like quite a large financial commitment, but compared to the collective GDP, it is actually a rather low-level commitment. And given the importance of issues like antibiotic resistance, then I think rich countries should be able to afford this.” While Könberg is convinced that the antibiotic issue
is one of the most important challenges facing modern society, he is also convinced that it will be through good research and the continued improvement of technology that we will be able to address many of the problems we now face – and he sees Nordic collaboration as a fine example of how these challenges can be met. For many, the ageing population is one of the stiffest
tests we face, both in terms of healthcare needs and its economic impact. While Könberg agrees with this, he does so with a great sense of optimism, developed through his many years of experience in the field. “When we first started to look at this, back in the 1970s, we all believed that as we grew older, we would get sicker and sicker and it would become more and more expensive to treat this sickness,” he explains. “But in the last 10 years or so I have changed my
opinion of this in a more positive way. It seems that yes, we are living longer, as we thought, but we are also staying healthier for longer and so the length of time when we are in need of care hasn’t changed that much. If it stays like that then this is not such a health problem. And if, as we have done in Sweden, we continue to spend a high proportion of GDP on healthcare, then I don’t see this as such a growing problem either. If you have a good healthcare system,
18
“It seems that we are living longer, as we thought, but we are also staying healthier
for longer and so the length of
time when we are in need of care hasn’t changed that much”
then it should be possible to live longer without it being such an issue. “Of course, if we have more older people not
working and so not contributing taxes to the economy, then we have a different sort of problem and this will need to be addressed,” he concedes. “But of course this is where technology can help. Take cataracts, for example. It is one of the more common problems of ageing but can now be treated faster and more efficiently because of technological advances, so saving money. “A lot of these innovations come with good research
and the Nordic region has a very good track record in research because for many years we have invested heavily in research and have been very quick in getting innovations from the research lab and into market production. “I hope this continues in terms of funding, but collaboration
is very important here as well,
particularly in testing and licencing. I would like to see that if something is accepted in one country, then it should be made available in all the Nordic countries rather than having to go through testing and licencing in each.”
★
You can read Bo Könberg’s full report here:
http://norden.diva-portal.org/smash/get/ diva2:723237/FULLTEXT01.pdf
Insight Publishers | Projects
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64