Inadvertently destroying the pharmaceutical industry would be one of the best possible outcomes.
Comment on Apple Watches with blood oxygen tech are banned again
collapse_already@lemmy.ml 5 months agoPatents literally are a government granted time-limited monopoly. There are a number of reasons why the government grants these monopolies. Perhaps, the ethics of medical patents should be debated, but if we collectively don’t grant patents on vital medical technologies, then I think it is unlikely that corporations are going to invest billions developing and testing life saving drugs. (Another debate: are private corporations the best stewards of developing this technology.)
For now, this is the system we’ve engineered ourselves into a corner with.
I don’t really care about some blood oxygen monitor in a smart watch, but inadvertently destroying the pharmaceutical industry over it probably ought to be carefully considered.
Curious_Canid@lemmy.ca 5 months ago
GentlemanLoser@ttrpg.network 5 months ago
Unless you’re currently sick but hey sacrifices need to be made
Curious_Canid@lemmy.ca 5 months ago
I didn’t say anything about stopping the manufacture of medications. There are any number of ways that could be handled which would be an improvement over our current pharmaceutical industry.
b3an@lemmy.world 5 months ago
I mean, if you got super sick in America right now… I bet you’d be thinking “oh fuck, this is going to cost me.” So, even though we have all this fancy medicine, how many people in the end actually get that medicine? Who Can afford it? Look at Ozempic and Wegovy, it’s for diabetics and pre-diabetics I believe, but there is a shortage on it because affluent people will shell out hundreds to lose weight.
Cuttlefish1111@lemmy.world 5 months ago
Doesn’t the government usually fund drug research and development?
collapse_already@lemmy.ml 5 months ago
In the U.S., private companies spend about 5x on drug development than the government. The numbers are probably fuzzier than that though because I don’t think the government spending numbers capture things like grants to graduate students working on drug research.
cooopsspace@infosec.pub 5 months ago
“It’s not enough that a company has a working product and a captive audience (sick people in need) but we need to ensure they’re the only ones that are able to bend these sick people over to profit off it.”
Yeah you’re right, it is as dumb as it sounds.
collapse_already@lemmy.ml 5 months ago
You spent 2 billion dollars developing a cure for x? I reverse engineered your cure for $30k (or just looked up your formula in your regulatory filings for free), so I can sell the same product for much cheaper than you since I don’t have any development costs to recoup. If you can’t protect your investment, you won’t make the investment.
The problem here is not the patent system. The problem is relying on private for-profit industry to develop drugs. Not enough people get your ailment for a cure to be profitable? Sorry, you are SOL. Also, the current system incentivises developing maintenance drugs over cures. That’s one of the big reasons Type 2 diabetes has met metformin, janumet, glipizide, farxiga, ozempic, etc. All of those drugs are symptom management rather than treatments. A treatment would be a financial disaster for big pharma.
nix@merv.news 5 months ago
Sorry but that’s such a ridiculous assertion. Companies wont innovate if they can’t hold a monopoly on what they make? Thank God one company has a patent and monopoly on touchscreens or companies would never have made smartphones, and the patent on routers saved us from never having the internet… patents are bullshit and should be banned. Monopolies don’t help innovation they stifle it and billion dollar conglomerates dont need more power to continue seeking profit.
GiveMemes@jlai.lu 5 months ago
Not to mention the fact that they get the money for developing these drugs from the government lmaooo