Excellent article Alsdad. Finally somebody is laying out the playing field the way it actually looks.
"But many of the middle-income countries with a high burden of hepatitis C, such as China, Brazil, Ukraine and Latin America, will continue to be excluded by the terms of voluntary licensing agreements from obtaining Indian generics – unless they pursue compulsory licensing. Dr Hill reminded the conference that the South African government’s threat to use compulsory licensing had been critical in opening the way to lower antiretroviral drug prices in the early 2000s."
"In the case of hepatitis C treatment, people could take matters into their own hands without waiting for governments. In Australia the FixhepC buyers club is working to assist individuals in buying generic drugs to treat hepatitis C"
So the world has the means to end the rationing of hepC drugs. Ie. use compulsory licensing - an internationally legal mechanism, and/or set up buyers clubs. Of the two, compulsory licensing is the more comprehensive approach for a country to gain the means of eradicating hepC. So you have to ask - why wouldn't any country with a large hepC population follow South Africa's lead and at least make a credible threat to introduce compulsory licensing? The way has even been paved for them to do so without the threat of international trade sanctions. Where are their financial spending priorities if not on a public health epidemic? I suspect that therein lies the answer.