The transatlantic trade and investment partnership and UK healthcare: Designed to meet the interests of corporations rather than patients, and imperative that it's stopped in its tracks

BMJ (Online)

Volumn 349, Issue , 2014, Pages

  Hilary, John ^a  

^a War on Want   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CANADA; CAPITAL; EUROPEAN UNION; HEALTH CARE; HEALTH CARE COST; INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION; INVESTMENT; LAW; LETTER; MARKETING; NATIONAL HEALTH SERVICE; POLITICS; PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE; UNITED KINGDOM; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84910068118     PISSN: 09598146     EISSN: 17561833     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.g6552     Document Type: Letter

References (4)

1. United Nations. Report of the special rapporteur on the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health. 2014. UN document A/69/299. http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N14/501/83/PDF/N1450183.pdf?OpenElement.
2. War on \Want, Unite, UNISON, GMB, UCU, NUT, et al. TTIP: no public benefits, but major costs. 2014. www.waronwant.org/attachments/TTIP%20mythbuster,%20Sept%202014.pdf.
3. Health Action International-Europe, Oxfam. Trading away access to medicines-revisited: how the European trade agenda continues to undermine access to medicines. Oxfam, 2014.
4. Sinclair S, Trew S, Mertins-Kirkwood H. Making sense of the CETA: an analysis of the final text of the canada-european union comprehensive economic and trade agreement. Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, 2014.