-
Asked by to Amy, Anita, Daryl, Nimesh, Sandra on 24 Jun 2014. This question was also asked by .
-
Anita Thomas answered on 24 Jun 2014:
@hannahgrimes, you are opening up a can of worms with this one! There are many people who think that some of the ‘poorer’ countries do have enough money to buy treatments, but they prefer to spend the money on armaments and the like. Why should we (and I don’t mean just scientists and drug companies) subsidise war, genocide and the like? That cannot be right!
My understanding is that drug companies are prepared to relax their prices in some circumstances. In addition, philanthropic foundations like the one founded by Bill Gates will help when it is needed.
-
-
Daryl Jones answered on 24 Jun 2014:
Hi hannahgrimes
It would be really nice if poorer countries could afford to provide treatment, but if patenting was changed to make that happen, the big drug companies would lose lots of money and they wouldn’t be able to make drugs for any country. Unfortunately money plays a big role in drug development!
-
Amy Monaghan answered on 25 Jun 2014:
Hannah you are on fire with these questions
Patenting is necessary to protect companies. Without it there is no way for them to make money from their inventions and therefore no money to reinvest into finding new drugs. I think a better way to deal with the situation is to reduce medical charges for poorer companies. Although this means developed countries are charged slightly more, it means that access to medicine is more widely available. As Anita has said there are also charitable foundations that will help to subsidise costs in the developing world.
Comments