Biogenesis Bagó Challenges Senasa‘s vaccine Regulations, Sparks Debate Over Competition and Quality
A legal challenge by Biogenesis Bagó against recent resolutions from Argentina‘s National Agri-Food Health and Quality Service (Senasa) regarding foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) vaccination has ignited a debate over market competition, vaccine standards, and constitutional rights. The company’s move, and subsequent defense of its actions, has drawn sharp criticism, particularly given its long-standing dominance in the Argentine vaccine market.
The dispute centers on Senasa’s modifications to FMD vaccination protocols, including a planned shift in 2026 to vaccinate only calves and heifers, a change projected to save livestock producers US $25 million annually, according to economy Minister Luis Caputo. Biogenesis Bagó argues that these resolutions infringe upon their constitutional rights, specifically those related to equality, property, and fair competition.
A statement attributed to former Central Bank President, sturzenegger, sharply criticized Biogenesis Bagó’s position, stating it “looks like a joke coming from a company that was favored by a standard that gave practically the exclusivity of a market for more than two decades.”
Biogenesis Bagó responded to these criticisms, asserting that their market position is not due to a lack of competition, highlighting their 70-year history of vaccine production in Argentina. They emphasized that Argentina is one of the few latin American countries with domestic FMD vaccine producers and adheres to stringent international standards set by the World Institution for Animal Health. The company also pointed out that vaccine imports have never been legally prohibited.
Regarding the strains used in their vaccines, Biogenesis Bagó contends that strains recently deemed “old” or “rare” are, in fact, still in demand globally, including in countries like the United States, Canada, and several nations in Asia and Europe, while the strains Senasa now favors are less widely used. They also challenged direct price comparisons of vaccines, arguing that differences in accompanying commercial services are frequently enough overlooked.
The company defended its decision to pursue legal action, stating it is a fundamental right in a democracy to seek redress when rights are believed to be violated. They further raised concerns about the quality of recently imported vaccines, claiming some failed to meet minimum quality control standards, potentially jeopardizing the health of the livestock sector.
Senasa, however, has maintained its authority over animal health measures, with Judge Lavié Pico recently denying a precautionary measure sought by Biogenesis bagó, affirming Senasa’s role in managing and authorizing these measures.
