h a l f b a k e r yTip your server.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
When we all rely on one source of a medicine, the day when
it will not be available is bound to come sooner than later.
(For
example, in my country the doctors played along with their
employers and wiped out the competition for a certain brand
of
Insulin).
To prevet this we need an idea
that on the one hand gives
incentive to companies to find the cure and research and
develop the medicine but on the other hand does not let one
group grow extremely rich by holding the rest of the world at
ransom.
We would rather see many people well paid, than one or two
very rich owners. On the other hand we do not want a
communist system where stealing from the rich to give the
poor
is the norm.
And we would rather have several competing companies
basically producing the same medicine, just like for
paracetamol we have Acamol and Tylenol and Panadol.
If in the car industry one company would have a patent on all
electric engines, we would be forced to buy an electric car
from
that company. The competition ensures that we can choose
from different important and unimportant categories which
fit
our likings, budget and brainwashed minds following
commercial advertisements.
As usual I don't explain myself well, forgetting crucial details
that are sitting in the back of my mind, but this time its on
purpose so that you my friends can interpret the idea and tell
me how it will work. (Or just fishbone it to death, if you are
not
so friendly).
Article about the price of insulin (from 2016)
https://www.statnew...in-prices-generics/
[xaviergisz, Nov 28 2021]
[link]
|
| |
For popular pharmaceuticals this is not a problem.
The moment the patent expires there are generic
drug manufacturers ready with their cheaper (but
identical) version of the drug. There are some
additional (legal but somewhat underhanded)
barriers such as 'evergreening' companies use to
keep the generics out for longer. |
|
| |
The problem is niche pharmaceuticals with only a
small number of people suffering from the ailment
which the drug treats. There is insufficient incentive
for generic manufacturers to make a generic
version. This lack of competition and small demand
keeps prices high. I can't think of any solutions to
this problem except direct government involvement
(e.g. subsidies). |
|
| |
Long term Insulin like Tregludek and Lantus are each singular.
There is only one source for them. There is one company
each that manufactures its brand and kind of medicine and
there is no other source for it. It seems that a minor change
in the laws would force people to share the manufacturing
and not be able to force prices so much more than their real
worth. Cancer treatment DNA tests, and biological medicine,
are so much more expensive than they would be if there was
any type of competition, and the patents are at fault. |
|
| |
Significant changes to patent laws are quite difficult
to make; all countries have signed up to international
agreements on patents (e.g the TRIPS agreement).
To make the changes you would need to either: a)
get all countrys to agree to the change, or b) remove
your country from the agreement. |
|
| |
A more likely path to change is getting
pharmaceutical companies to make their own
industry-wide agreements similar to the FRAND
agreement which is common in the computer/phone
industries. |
|
| |
// To prevet this we need an idea that on the one hand [...] // |
|
| |
Looks like you're asking for an idea rather than sharing an idea, and
yours is a question or category ("Distributed Patents"), rather than an
answer. As per Halfbakery help page: |
|
| |
"Generally, the more you know (and can explain!) about the technology
behind your invention, the more interesting the posting will be." |
|
| |
So, I suggest publishing this as an "Issue" on the http://infinity.family to get
ideas about this. |
|
| |
A distributed patent system is an interesting
concept. Bringing together the R and D resources of
several companies in some "coopetition" as a result
could make all kinds of sense from a healthcare
challenge perspective. |
|
| |
The title I misread conjures an image of a world where there
aren't enough patients to go around & doctors have to share
them or go without, as a result of my myopic misapprehension
regarding the core concept of this idea Sturton was very
disappointed
by the singular lack of body parts being sent by mail involved. |
|
| |