Sometimes great medical steps forward come unexpectedly, and sometimes they are the result of long and expensive research by pharmaceutical companies. Sometimes they happen by sheer good luck. Such an event recently happened in California.
A man suffering AIDS was given a bone marrow transplant to try and treat Leukaemia, and to the surprise of his doctors - the AIDS disappeared. Further research revealed that the bone marrow specimen came from a person with a fairly rare blood cell immunity to AIDS. The medical fraternity realised that they were on the cusp of a new discovery. If they were able to isolate - and then replicate - this genetic " miracle " they could possibly have found a cure for both AIDS and Diabetes.
Like most medical breakthroughs, it is a long road from theory to the day when a new product appears on pharmacy shelves to begin treating patients. There is a lot of research still to be done and then will come the long journey through the labrynth of testing on a small group of patients, some of whom will form a control group by being given a placebo while others get " the real McCoy ".
The " testing time " is usually measured in years, and that opens up the can of worms involving the recovery of the cost of development. Bringing a new drug to life can run to millions of dollars and the laboratory concerned has a right to patent protection. As a result, for the term of the patent the company that developed the drug or the treatment method is entitled to exclusive manufacturing rights. Even recovering the money spent on development can cause the product cost to be way out of reach of most patients and that is before the company starts to make a profit.
Here in the developed world new drugs face a battle with the bureaucracy to get acceptance onto the Pharmaceutical Benefits scheme. Miracle treatments save lives, but they also blow out health costs and there is usually a time gap between discovery and the time they come into wider use. For the people in the developing world, that is a gap that may never be bridged.
Perhaps we are treating the funding of medical research from the wrong way around. The various medical disciplines are constantly asking us for money for medical research and yet when that research succeeds, patents are involved and often the very people who donated to try and find a cure are denied that drug on cost grounds.
Medical research companies are not going to risk the research gamble unless there is the lure of financial reward for success: That can only be assured by way of patent protection. Perhaps we need to encourage people to donate to a non-specific fund to provide a pool of money to acquire the patents on developments which are deemed " essential to all humanity ". For instance, a treatment that cures Malaria or a drug that prevents Alzheimer's disease would fit that category.
When such a breakthrough occurs, it would be worth an expert panel estimating the total return the patent holder could expect from that patent, and the law changed to require the patent to pass into public hands after the payment of that sum of money. It would then be available for the treatment of patients in all countries of the world - without the .cost barrier.
It would also return decision making to the general public. If a new development offered a cure for an ailment that people deemed essential and the fund was insufficient to reimburse the discoverer, then to achieve that result the public would need to make donations according to their ability. It would be the " carrot and stick " approach. If you want this benefit for you and your family - then the only way to get it at an affordable cost for all - is to write a cheque !
A more specific way of raising funds - with a very qualifying target in sight - might achieve rewards lacking in the present system !
No comments:
Post a Comment