Hi everyone:
This has been bugging me for a while. Here is an example of a new potential drug in the arsenol - one that could tackle cancer, is easy to take (no chemo infusions!) and has potentially fewer than usual side effects............. the drawback? It's not patentable because the medicine is already in the public arena.
http://calsun.canoe.ca/News/Alberta/...99917-sun.html
http://www.economist.com/science/dis...ory_id=8548706
Therefore there will be no funding available to move this drug forward. Millions apon millions are being raised & donated to fund research. I assume that most of that money goes to subsidize the efforts of existing pharma. What about research like this that is already in the public arena and will probably die on the vine?
Fewer and fewer universities can afford to do empirical research anymore. It all has to be "partnered" with private enterprise. The government sits back and waits for the results of private enterprise research & billions of dollars of trial results to be conveniently dropped in their laps for licensing.
How many other possibilities are there just left lying on the floor due to lack of profitablility?
I admire the "risk-takers". Companies & people that combine their resources to produce the research that create drugs. Naturally people/companies that put their money at risk need a reward for doing so as the potential to NEVER see any of their money back again exists.
But the government & the public need to also support these other types of endeavors. Ones that could be just as beneficial - but don't have the financial incentive attached needed to create the huge pool of investors to finance the risky tests & trials needed to bring it to fruition.
Does anybody have any ideas?
Merridith
Threaded Mode