Reframing the public support/patent debate

When it comes to lowering the high cost of drugs, most of the debate seems to center around whether it's better to fund drug research through government-granted monopolies or by using taxpayer dollars to fund the research directly. Having been exposed to some of the grant writing process and the patent process, I can't imagine how anyone can think either of these two alternatives is a good idea. Perhaps there's an alternative other than using government force through either monopoly granting or taxation that will get us the research we want.

Frequently lumped in with the idea of taxpayer support of drug research is non-profit, donor-funded organizations. I'm not sure why these two things are considered related, since non-profits are *private* and funded by voluntary donations, while the government is funded through forcible taxes. Unlike government, non-profits are (usually) driven by a mandate to actually help people, rather than just keeping their constituents (some of the most powerful of whom are the drug companies themselves) happy.

While drug companies have an incentive to develop drugs that make them lots of money and the politicians simply have to look like they're "doing" something, the non-profits are usually driven by philanthropy. Had the father who put the initiative on the ballot in California to force taxpayers to pay for stem cell research instead started a non-profit to research his son's specific condition, or donated to one and encouraged others to do the same, he would almost certainly have gotten a lot more bang for his buck, especially if stem cell research turns out to be a dead end.

There are other motivators in the world besides profit and force.

Share this

I think there should be a

I think there should be a tax free pot of gold at the end of the goal, along with a tax free profit stream for a period of years as well. I don't believe that monopoly is the best encouragment of inovation either.

The use of government force

The use of government force to grant a monopoly in the form of patents is the "force" I was referring to in my post.

Not taxing a company's profits on a drug is no better than patents in that it will still encourage development of only drugs that result in lots of money, whereas non-profits don't have this motive.

Another thing that needs to happen if you want to phase out taxes is that the FDA needs to be streamlined. Ideally, I'd let it be replaced by something like Underwriter's Labratories.

Our system of "find a drug

Our system of "find a drug to solve every ailment" needs a serious change. What we have are drug companies doing research not on curing diseases, but on treating symptoms. The reason is simple: Symptoms need ongoing treatment, so treating symptoms provides an ongoing source of revenue. In the meantime, we have vitamins that are much cheaper, more effective, and less dangerous, but unpatentable and less profitable. And they are essentially unmarketable because FDA prohibits the use of any health claim related to vitamins ("This product is not intended to cure or prevent any disease"). In the meantime, FDA doesn't act to stop the sale of drugs that are killing people, and is slow to approve drugs that might save lives.

I have invention

I have invention record[since/25/7/2000/ register N.5865/in syria] of electrical system install in electric-car its load 1 ton and we try to make the load greater.the invention supplies the electric-car with its need of electricity permanently day and night during parking and driving .by using this system ,could produced friendly environment electrical-cars [with the same specifications of the using cars now]free from exhaust gas and not need oil or fuel there is no need to stop car for battery recharging[recharge battery automatical].this system can be used in the production of electric generators with different power .we ready to agreement with you ,and to execute invention at your laboratories or in my laboratories. because I have not enough money.The invention depend on electro-magnetic capacity addition moment of inertia [two parts{ mechanical part} ,{electrical part}]
the invention consist of new electric - charger[my design ] and two groups of batteries. / A / batteries. group / B /

how it work ( general view ) ?
when / A /battery group supply the electric engine of car by the electric .
in the same time the / B / in charging . when / A / be empty , the / B / will be supplying the electric engine of car by the electric , and / A / in charging.
the employ materials [iron,copper,plastic] my purpose from these invention to make the air is clean ,[in other apply possible use it to provide the factories by its electric[ use it in the station case easier than the mobile case] if we execute the invention possible say good-by smoke and pollution, possible you sent watcher to see and finance,
to explain the invention we need to long meeting because it not easy. unable to explain it by writing in any way we use in it the gravity law ,the electro-magnetic capacity ,moment of inertia ,levers laws ,we consume the electric power and gravity power to produce electric quantity more than consumed electric power and we consume all the used gravity power ,as you know the gravity power is free I can not explain more.
ENG.Amir kara fallah-syria