PATENT MONOPOLIES, CORRUPTION AND THE NEW ALZHEIMER’S DRUG

August 1, 2021 – 6:09 am

HOW TO DONATE

Our costs will always be there. So readers who can donate towards the cost of the site, please open a Skrill account. Readers who wish to contribute to BigO will now have to use Skrill (click here). We are no longer able to use PayPal to receive donations. Register an account at Skrill. To make a payment, use this e-mail address as recipient’s e-mail address in Skrill: mail2[at]bigomagazine.com. Looking forward to hearing from you.

+ + + + +

JUST TO LET YOU KNOW
To reduce spamming, the BigO website is going through Cloudflare. What it does is scan your browser to ensure the visitor is not a spam. Do not be alarmed as this usually takes only a few seconds.  Email us if you still have difficulty accessing the BigO site; or playing or downloading the tracks. If you know a better way of reducing spam, do let us know.

+ + + + +

Profit before care. Drug makers are motivated by profit. We are saying the obvious. By Dean Baker.

It seems that no one in policy circles believes that people respond to incentives. How else can we explain this lengthy piece in the New York Times (NYT) on the process by which the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved Aduhelm, a drug for treating Alzheimer’s disease.

The piece details how the clinical trials designed to determine its effectiveness were aborted, since it did not appear to be helping patients. Nonetheless, the FDA worked closely with Biogen, the drug’s manufacturer, to find evidence that it might be effective in slowing cognitive decline. The FDA ended up approving the drug over the unanimous objection of its advisory panel. (There was one abstention.)

Incredibly, the piece never once mentions the role of government-granted patent monopolies in this outcome. Biogen was very anxious to get the drug approved because it intends to take advantage of this monopoly and charge US$56,000 for a year’s treatment. If the drug would be available as a generic, which anyone could manufacture, the price would be far lower and there would be much less incentive to pressure the FDA to approve a drug of questionable effectiveness.

Obviously, we need to pay drug companies to research and develop new drugs. But patent monopolies are only one mechanism, and because of the perverse incentives they create, often not a very good one. (The opioid crisis is another example of the harm resulting from the perverse incentives created by patent monopolies.)

My preferred route is direct government contracting for research, as we did with Moderna in the development of a coronavirus vaccine. (We also let them get patent monopolies, since some folks feel you can never give drug companies too much money.)

In addition to getting lower priced drugs, and eliminating the perverse incentives created by patent monopolies, direct funding would also allow for open-source research. This means that all researchers could quickly learn from the successes and failures of others doing similar work.

In the case of coronavirus vaccines, this might have prevented Pfizer from throwing out one-sixth of its vaccines because it did not realize that its standard vial contained six doses rather than five. It may also have allowed it to realize more quickly that its vaccine did not need to be super-frozen but instead could be stored in a normal freezer for up to two weeks. (I outline a mechanism for funding research in Chapter 5 of Rigged [it’s free].)

Anyhow, it would be nice if we could one day have a serious discussion of alternative mechanisms for financing research  instead of acting as though the patent system came down to us from god. Apparently, the NYT is not even willing to acknowledge the corruption that results from the incentives it creates.

That is not good.

Note: Dean Baker is the senior economist at the Center for Economic and Policy Research in Washington, DC. The above article first appeared on Dean Baker’s Beat the Press blog. It was also posted at CounterPunch.

+ + + + +

  1. 2 Responses to “PATENT MONOPOLIES, CORRUPTION AND THE NEW ALZHEIMER’S DRUG”

  2. Vaccines CAUSE cancer, Alzheimers, Parkinsons, sterility, meningitis, etc. Everyone has an immune system that works prefectly well until some prick injects you with a solution that makes Big Pharma rich and you a customer for LIFE!
    Vaccines are NOT for the benefit of mankind, they’re for the benefit of the Big Pharma only - NO PROFIT IN HEALTHY PEOPLE - MAKE ‘EM SICK AND PAY UP

    By J.Barlow on Aug 1, 2021

  3. Jerkoff.Barlow is back. ASSHOLE.

    By DD on Aug 2, 2021

Post a Comment