John Whelan: Ireland behind the curve in pharma R&D amid Pfizer call
Pharma companies met with the Trump administration earlier this month to try and defer implementation of the executive order signed by President Trump on May 12, effectively forcing drug companies to commit to aligning their US prices with 'the lowest price of a set of economic peer countries''.
At the meeting of the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA) with the Trump administration, Pfizer chief executive Albert Bourla called for the US government to lead an initiative to increase overall drug spending outside the US.
While the exact mechanism of implementing the Trump executive order to reduce drug prices in the US remains unclear, the Pfizer chief proposed an alternative solution, suggesting that other countries should spend a certain percentage of their GDP per capita on innovative medicines.
In an attempt to lead on the recommendation, he added that Pfizer could consider not making its drugs available for government reimbursement in some countries if the US carries through on its price control and other countries don't increase their prices.
Effectively, Mr Bourla, who chairs the pharma industry lobby group PhRMA, suggested the US should push for a Nato-type agreement, which commits each country to a minimum 2% of their national GDP on defence spending.
And whereas there may be good logic in the Pfizer proposal, any commitment of this nature will likely create major challenges for Ireland, as OECD and World Bank figures show Ireland lagging well behind other countries in research and development expenditure.
In 2022, the last year for which finalised figures have been released, US pharmaceutical companies' R&D spending amounted to 2.33% of the nation's GDP.
There is no comparable figures for the Irish market, in terms of pharmaceutical industry expenditure in research and development. However, the figures available from the World Bank and the OECD for years 2022/2023 show that total R&D for all industry as a percentage of GDP, in Ireland was 0.9%. This is well below the EU average of 2.29%, and even further below countries like the US at 3.6% and Israel at 6.3% who invest more heavily in R&D than Ireland.
Economists have inferred that Trump is leveraging unfavourable policies such as drastically lowering prices points of US drugs and tariffs on imports, to coerce the pharmaceutical industry to increase investments in the US.
Several large pharma companies, including Eli Lilly, Merck & Co, and Bristol Myers Squibb, have unveiled major US investments planned for the next few years in attempt to curry favour with the Trump administration. But noticeably Pfizer remains an exception to that trend.
However, Mr Bourla stated that Pfizer has invested in US manufacturing and will continue to do so, but risks from those Trump policies are making it difficult for the company to commit further. "I don't think it makes sense to make announcements of future investments in an environment that is very fluid,' Mr Bourla said.
That suggests Pfizer, one of our largest and longest-term investors in the pharmaceuticals space, is unlikely to back off its Irish investments anytime soon. However , we need to heed the Pfizer CEO's call for more R&D support in Europe, which clearly includes Ireland.
Besides Pfizer, many pharma companies are leveraging the United States' threat of tariffs on drug imports to push for policy changes in the EU. In a letter sent on April 11 to European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, 32 pharma companies demanded more favourable policies in order for them to maintain operations in the EU . In the same letter they say that policy changes are needed to ensure Europe remains a location to research, develop, and manufacture medicines.
The CEOs also included in their letter that European countries should rethink their drug pricing policies and enable a better commercial environment for innovative medicines.
Ireland's Research and Innovation Act 2024 , replaces Science Foundation Ireland in an attempt to fast forward the provision for the funding of research and innovation, but this caters for all fields of activity and neither commits to double the level of funding to €2bn per year needed to reach EU level, nor does it commit to meet the specific requirements of the pharma industry.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Journal
4 hours ago
- The Journal
Political parties scramble to introduce policies around AI use after Swedish House Mafia-gate
IRISH POLITICAL PARTIES are beginning to develop policies around the use of artificial intelligence (AI) after MEP Ciaran Mullooly revealed he used it to write a letter to the President of the European Commission. In the letter, which urged the EU to deliver more aid to Gaza, the Independent Ireland MEP inadvertently quoted the house music group Swedish House Mafia and recounted a fictional story of a girl in Rafah without indicating that she was not real. Following this, The Journal contacted all political parties represented in Dáil Éireann to see if they have policies or guidelines in place around the use of AI for public representatives. No party currently does. While the Labour Party said it has been working on guidelines since earlier this year, other parties were left scrambling after Mullooly's AI-assisted letter made headlines. The Social Democrats, Fine Gael and Independent Ireland all said they are currently working on developing policies, while the Green Party is also examining the idea as part of a strategic plan. A Sinn Féin source admitted that the Mullooly story was sent around to TDs as a 'cautionary tale' but said the party does not currently have any guidelines around the use of AI. Despite the slow uptake from political HQs on the issue, many TDs were more vocal about their feelings on the use of the technology in public life. When asked if they use AI to assist their work as a TD, just four current members of the Dáil admitted that they do. Independent TD Barry Heneghan used AI to create a song as part of his election campaign and said he uses a mix of programmes now as a TD, such as ChatGPT and Microsoft 365 Co-pilot, depending on the work he wants to streamline. Fianna Fáil's Paul McAuliffe, Fine Gael's John Paul O'Shea and Labour's Conor Sheehan all said they use programmes like ChatGPT and Co-pilot on occasion to help with admin tasks, but all were of the view that it shouldn't be used for drafting speeches or public statements. Advertisement 'I think transparency is important in this job. It's still up to TDs to stand over what they say and do, and AI can make mistakes and add things in that you would never say,' Heneghan said. He added: 'If you trusted it for your whole speech, it doesn't sound human in my opinion.' Independent Ireland TD Ken O'Flynn compared AI to the printing press and said his party supports the 'responsible use' of the emerging technology. 'Whether to improve communication or streamline workflows, like the printing press or the personal computer, artificial intelligence may face scepticism in its early stages but if history has shown us anything, it is that new tools often begin with controversy and end with positive transformation.' Most other TDs we contacted said they do not use AI to assist with their work, although many parties said staff sometimes use it for research purposes or admin. When asked if politicians should have to disclose when they have used AI to draft a speech or statement, most TDs we contacted said yes. A spokesperson for Independent Ireland said it 'would not be a bad idea in the interests of transparency', while Green Party leader Roderic O'Gorman went further and said it should also be disclosed when politicians use it to alter images of themselves. A number of TDs said it came down to being honest with constituents, while others, like People Before Profit TD Paul Murphy, said he was against its use on environmental grounds. Labour TD Duncan Smith argued that it is lazy for TDs to use AI. The Dublin Fingal East TD said he doesn't use it because he has 'no interest in selling my constituents short'. 'When people elect you to represent them, it should actually be you and the team you put together to work with you, representing your constituents. 'I think TDs using AI are displaying laziness at best and I think it shows a lack of respect to the people who have elected you to the Dáil, who rightfully expect you to be putting in the work,' he said. Readers like you are keeping these stories free for everyone... A mix of advertising and supporting contributions helps keep paywalls away from valuable information like this article. Over 5,000 readers like you have already stepped up and support us with a monthly payment or a once-off donation. Learn More Support The Journal
Irish Examiner
4 hours ago
- Irish Examiner
Trump says he is open to regime change in Iran
President Donald Trump has called into question the future of Iran's ruling theocracy, seemingly contradicting his administration's earlier calls to resume negotiations and avoid an escalation in fighting. 'It's not politically correct to use the term, 'Regime Change,' but if the current Iranian Regime is unable to MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN, why wouldn't there be a Regime change???' Mr Trump posted on social media. 'MIGA!!!' The posting on Truth Social marked something of a reversal from defence secretary Pete Hegseth's Sunday morning news conference that detailed the aerial bombing on three of the country's nuclear sites. 'This mission was not and has not been about regime change,' Mr Hegseth said. "The damage to the Nuclear sites in Iran is said to be 'monumental.' The hits were hard and accurate. Great skill was shown by our military. Thank you!" –President Donald J. Trump — The White House (@WhiteHouse) June 22, 2025 Secretary of state Marco Rubio warned on Fox News that any retaliation against the US or a rush toward building a nuclear weapon would 'put the regime at risk'. Mr Trump's warning to Iran's leadership comes as the US has demanded that Iran not respond to the bombardment of the heart of a nuclear programme it spent decades developing. The Trump administration has made a series of intimidating statements even as it has simultaneously called to restart negotiations, making it hard to get a complete read on whether the president is simply taunting an adversary or using inflammatory words that could further widen the war between Israel and Iran that began earlier this month. Up until the president's post on Sunday afternoon, the coordinated messaging by Mr Trump's vice president, Pentagon chief, top military adviser and secretary of state suggested a confidence that any fallout would be manageable and that Iran's lack of military capabilities would ultimately force it back to the bargaining table. Mr Hegseth had said that America 'does not seek war' with Iran, while Vice President JD Vance said the strikes have given Tehran the possibility of returning to negotiate with Washington. But the unfolding situation is not entirely under Washington's control, as Tehran has a series of levers to respond to the aerial bombings, which could intensify the conflict in the Middle East with possible global repercussions. Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth speaks during a news conference at the Pentagon on Sunday (Alex Brandon/AP) Iran can block oil being shipped through the Strait of Hormuz, attack US bases in the region, engage in cyber attacks or double down on a nuclear programme might seem like more of a necessity after the US strike. Mr Trump, who had addressed the nation from the White House on Saturday night, returned to social media on Sunday to lambast Republican Congress member Thomas Massie, who had objected to the president taking military action without specific congressional approval. 'We had a spectacular military success yesterday, taking the 'bomb' right out of their hands (and they would use it if they could!)' Mr Trump said as part of the post on Truth Social. At their joint Pentagon briefing, Mr Hegseth and Air Force General Dan Caine, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said 'Operation Midnight Hammer' involved decoys and deception, and met with no Iranian resistance. General Caine indicated that the goal of the operation — destroying nuclear sites in Fordo, Natanz and Isfahan — had been achieved. 'Final battle damage will take some time, but initial battle damage assessments indicate that all three sites sustained extremely severe damage and destruction,' he said. An electronic billboard beams an image of president Donald Trump alongside the message 'Thank you, Mr. President' referring to the US involvement in the war between Israel and Iran (Bernat Armangue/AP) While US officials urged caution and stressed that only nuclear sites were targeted by Washington, Iran criticised the actions as a violation of its sovereignty and international law. Iran's foreign minister Abbas Araghchi said Washington was 'fully responsible' for whatever actions Tehran may take in response. 'They crossed a very big red line by attacking nuclear facilities,' he said at a news conference in Turkey. 'I don't know how much room is left for diplomacy.' China and Russia, where Araghchi was heading for talks with President Vladimir Putin, condemned the US military action. The attacks were 'a gross violation of international law,' said Russia's Foreign Ministry, which also advocated 'returning the situation to a political and diplomatic course.' A Turkish Foreign Ministry statement warned about the risk of the conflict spreading to 'a global level'. British Prime Minister Keir Starmer said the United Kingdom was moving military equipment into the area to protect its interests, people and allies. His office said he talked on Sunday with Mr Trump about the need for Tehran to resume negotiations, but Mr Trump would have posted his remarks about regime change after their conversation. The leaders of Italy, Canada, Germany and France agreed on the need for 'a rapid resumption of negotiations.' France's Emmanuel Macron held talks with the Saudi Crown Prince and the Sultan of Oman.
Irish Examiner
4 hours ago
- Irish Examiner
John Whelan: Ireland behind the curve in pharma R&D amid Pfizer call
Pharma companies met with the Trump administration earlier this month to try and defer implementation of the executive order signed by President Trump on May 12, effectively forcing drug companies to commit to aligning their US prices with 'the lowest price of a set of economic peer countries''. At the meeting of the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA) with the Trump administration, Pfizer chief executive Albert Bourla called for the US government to lead an initiative to increase overall drug spending outside the US. While the exact mechanism of implementing the Trump executive order to reduce drug prices in the US remains unclear, the Pfizer chief proposed an alternative solution, suggesting that other countries should spend a certain percentage of their GDP per capita on innovative medicines. In an attempt to lead on the recommendation, he added that Pfizer could consider not making its drugs available for government reimbursement in some countries if the US carries through on its price control and other countries don't increase their prices. Effectively, Mr Bourla, who chairs the pharma industry lobby group PhRMA, suggested the US should push for a Nato-type agreement, which commits each country to a minimum 2% of their national GDP on defence spending. And whereas there may be good logic in the Pfizer proposal, any commitment of this nature will likely create major challenges for Ireland, as OECD and World Bank figures show Ireland lagging well behind other countries in research and development expenditure. In 2022, the last year for which finalised figures have been released, US pharmaceutical companies' R&D spending amounted to 2.33% of the nation's GDP. There is no comparable figures for the Irish market, in terms of pharmaceutical industry expenditure in research and development. However, the figures available from the World Bank and the OECD for years 2022/2023 show that total R&D for all industry as a percentage of GDP, in Ireland was 0.9%. This is well below the EU average of 2.29%, and even further below countries like the US at 3.6% and Israel at 6.3% who invest more heavily in R&D than Ireland. Economists have inferred that Trump is leveraging unfavourable policies such as drastically lowering prices points of US drugs and tariffs on imports, to coerce the pharmaceutical industry to increase investments in the US. Several large pharma companies, including Eli Lilly, Merck & Co, and Bristol Myers Squibb, have unveiled major US investments planned for the next few years in attempt to curry favour with the Trump administration. But noticeably Pfizer remains an exception to that trend. However, Mr Bourla stated that Pfizer has invested in US manufacturing and will continue to do so, but risks from those Trump policies are making it difficult for the company to commit further. "I don't think it makes sense to make announcements of future investments in an environment that is very fluid,' Mr Bourla said. That suggests Pfizer, one of our largest and longest-term investors in the pharmaceuticals space, is unlikely to back off its Irish investments anytime soon. However , we need to heed the Pfizer CEO's call for more R&D support in Europe, which clearly includes Ireland. Besides Pfizer, many pharma companies are leveraging the United States' threat of tariffs on drug imports to push for policy changes in the EU. In a letter sent on April 11 to European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, 32 pharma companies demanded more favourable policies in order for them to maintain operations in the EU . In the same letter they say that policy changes are needed to ensure Europe remains a location to research, develop, and manufacture medicines. The CEOs also included in their letter that European countries should rethink their drug pricing policies and enable a better commercial environment for innovative medicines. Ireland's Research and Innovation Act 2024 , replaces Science Foundation Ireland in an attempt to fast forward the provision for the funding of research and innovation, but this caters for all fields of activity and neither commits to double the level of funding to €2bn per year needed to reach EU level, nor does it commit to meet the specific requirements of the pharma industry.
