__/ [ Mark Kent ] on Wednesday 27 December 2006 10:45 \__
> begin oe_protect.scr
> Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
>> Scrooge and intellectual property rights
>>
>> ,----[ Quote ]
>>| A medical prize fund could improve the financing of drug
>>| innovations
>>|
>>| At Christmas, we traditionally retell Dickens's story of Scrooge,
>>| who cared more for money than for his fellow human beings. What
>>| would we think of a Scrooge who could cure diseases that blighted
>>| thousands of people's lives but did not do so? Clearly, we would
>>| be horrified. But this has increasingly been happening in the name
>>| of economics, under the innocent sounding guise of "intellectual
>>| property rights."
>> `----
>>
>> http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/333/7582/1279
>>
>> The idea of Open Source medicine can be discussed in this context.
>>
>> Software patents/costs = digital divide
>> Medical patents/costs = life or death
>>
>
> I've been struggling with this problem for a long time. I really don't
> know what the answer is. The major drugs companies genuinely need a lot
> of cash in order to set up research labs, and the education systems
> need to be good enough to turn out scientists of the highest quality in
> order to be able to perform useful tasks in those labs. Further, the
> manufacturers need sufficient funds to build production lines, source
> whatever raw materials are required, and the distributors need the
> logistics systems in order to move the products to where they're needed.
>
> On the other side of things, we have millions of people suffering from
> all kinds of curable diseases, who live in countries where they have no
> national health service, nor even much more than very rudimentary
> educational systems. It's quite likely that many diseases could be
> avoided just by knowing what to do, or what not to do, hence things like
> the OLPC project will be likely to have a very positive impact on this
> problem.
>
> Additionally, in many very poor countries, the life expectancy of
> children is so low that people will have more children in order to
> ensure some survive. Again, this behaviour needs to be addressed, but
> can only be addressed when medicine and education are available to
> ensure the survival of offspring, however, the advantage is that there
> are more resources per capita when the birth rate is reduced.
>
> How far can and should the rich countries go in order to help the poor
> ones? How much of our vast wealth are we prepared to give up? Can we
> find a way of helping /without/ losing our wealth? Or do we just wait
> for global warming to kill us all, so that the oilmen can go to their
> graves, with massive bank balances that nobody will ever draw, at banks
> which no longer exist?
>
> The wealth imbalance is so massive that war may be inevitable,
> unless there's some other way of improving the lot of the poor.
> Nuclear, chemical and biological weapons technologies are freely
> available around the planet now, so if we /don't/ help the poor
> countries to improve their state, then they're likely to look for ways
> of helping themselves. Can you expect people living in poverty next
> door to a goldmine not to covet it, not to take action to gain their
> "fair share"? Are they an "axis of evil" or a bunch of poor people who
> want a share of the planet's wealth? I know how the US media likes to
> position them, and I'm pretty sure I know how they would see themselves.
>
> Ah, so many questions, so few answers.
All of these discussions are bound to go off-topic, but I agree with
everything you say. This flawed economic model which mistreats a large
portion of society and creates enormous gaps in wealth is both undemocratic
and detrimental to the idea of healthy capitalism. Inevitably, this may lead
to groundbreaking changes (e.g. war). How do you think, for example, the
following refugees will feel, knowing that the world thrives in waste while
completely (and maybe deliberately/conveniently) oblivious to the impact on
others?
http://news.independent.co.uk/environment/article2099971.ece
What really toasts the bagel are the US Government's recent steps to guard
against academic and media publications that reveal information about global
warming. Could these hurt the G8 economy? Surely. But what's an economy if
there's no humanity?
The same goes for medical patents. If funds can be allotted for various
high-priority projects, why can't there be steps which decentralise and
de-privatise the creating and dissemination of vital drugs? I believe that
people's perception of property is tainted by Hollywood and ideologies that
follow the American Dream. Many of the same observation can be applied to
reason about the software industry. There is too little collaboration. This
hurts society as a whole while the excuse for titans is that greed buys
innovation.
--
~~ Kind greetings and happy holidays!
Roy S. Schestowitz | #00ff00 Day - Basket Case
http://Schestowitz.com | Open Prospects ¦ PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
Tasks: 139 total, 1 running, 136 sleeping, 0 stopped, 2 zombie
http://iuron.com - knowledge engine, not a search engine
|
|
