|
Authored by: tiger99 on Monday, April 15 2013 @ 07:51 AM EDT |
As a sufferer from kidney cancer, this case utterly sickens me. The underlying
problem is that greedy people want to profit from the suffering of others. Plus,
of course, badly broken patent law.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
- Thirded. - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, April 15 2013 @ 09:36 AM EDT
- Fourthed - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, April 15 2013 @ 10:32 AM EDT
- Three-Point-Fived - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 16 2013 @ 08:31 AM EDT
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, April 15 2013 @ 08:44 AM EDT |
Unfortunately, there's a decided lack of that rare commodity
(common) sense in the US. Don't pin your hopes on it for
anything.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
- Common sense - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, April 15 2013 @ 09:28 AM EDT
- Common sense - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, April 15 2013 @ 09:31 AM EDT
- Common sense - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, April 15 2013 @ 09:50 AM EDT
- Common sense - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, April 15 2013 @ 10:23 AM EDT
- Common sense - Authored by: DannyB on Monday, April 15 2013 @ 03:13 PM EDT
|
Authored by: albert on Monday, April 15 2013 @ 11:59 AM EDT |
_. _ [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, April 15 2013 @ 12:51 PM EDT |
...y'know. I believe that patenting genes is bad policy -
for similar reasons that patenting software is bad policy.
They serve as building blocks - and patents impede forwards
progress by siloing development. Well, unless restricted to
moderate license fees. The patents are also a bit
ridiculous.
...but...medical research is ridiculously costly and
absolutely full of failures. Please don't underestimate
that. There's a ~billion dollar industry just dissecting
baby rats to check for birth defects just because of the
thalidomide tragedy.
...people aren't applying for patents and charging
ridiculous prices out of pure greed. Successful products
currently _need_ to be ridiculously profitable to cover the
cost of many, many expensive failures.
...so...if you eliminate medical patents in general to
prevent companies ransoming peoples lives...you also would
be well-advised to balance the following factors...
1. Reduced development from decreased profitability.
Basically, if you don't grant a monopoly, the government
needs to finance all development and testing. Is that a big
deal? Maybe not. It probably corresponds to raising the
NIH budget from 30 B USD to ?150 B? or so and encouraging
translational work. (Assuming reduced allocation efficiency
and assuming that ~1/3 of medical development is already
gov't funded.)
2. Lower medical costs...
If we did this...there wouldn't be 'new, super-expensive
drugs.' And uninsured people wouldn't be hit with bills
that were quite so terrible.
3. Reduced incentives...some of that 150 B needs to be
bounties for successful projects.
--Argyle[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, April 15 2013 @ 03:28 PM EDT |
All I can do is say how sorry I am for the actions of my country.
Unfortunately, democracy died some time ago in the US and the only
thing that matters to most people here is money and corporate profit.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
- apology - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 16 2013 @ 08:43 AM EDT
|
|
|
|