With the presidential election coming up in less than a year, important issues are being debated, but the affordability of medicine is not. Many Americans simply cannot afford the medicine necessary to carry out their day-to-day lives, while at the same time making ends meet. Many lifesaving medicines are extremely expensive, especially for the more than 49 million Americans without health insurance.
The biggest reason prescription drugs are so expensive is because certain pharmaceutical companies hold exclusive patents on certain drugs, which prohibits other companies from manufacturing generic versions. The reason for these patents are two-fold: to protect scientists from having their inventions and intellectual property stolen, and to allow for companies to make a profit to fund research and development of new medical innovations. As a result, many new drugs are insulated from market competition that might help drive down the cost of these medicines for consumers, especially when companies take advantage of loopholes by minutely altering their products to prolong patent life.
When Lipitor, a medicine that manages cholesterol levels, had its patent end in November, new generic versions of the drug forced the price of the drug to drop, and it is expected to eventually decrease to 90 percent of its original price by the end of the year.
With the high prices United States pharmaceutical patents pass on to consumers, especially those not covered by health insurance, many people should want these laws revised or rescinded. The cost of medicine could be immediately lowered by allowing for the importation of cheap drugs from places like Africa and Asia, where governments allow their industries to make generic versions of certain life-saving medications, such as those used to treat AIDS, in order to circumvent the high prices charged for imported American drugs.
Although this solution would immediately lower the cost for consumers, it would ultimately have a negative effect on long-term innovation.
In the field of science, it is well known that research and development for industries are not the highest paying jobs. A recent study found only 13 percent of pharmaceutical companies’ profits go back into research and development. Even though most scientists pursue this field because of a passion for research, they still aren’t paid very well, considering the effort they have put into development and improvement of products and technologies for the companies. Any weakening or elimination of pharmaceutical patent laws would inevitably lower the amount of money going to research and development, which could ultimately reduce the number of scientist in the field, many of whom would seek out different fields in which they received a more reasonable reward for their time and efforts. This brain drain from research and development would in turn reduce the amount of medication available to the general public in the long run.
The fact that many people cannot afford the drugs necessary to provide a decent standard of living is a very real problem, but screwing over scientists working in medical research and development by crippling or eliminating patents on medicines is not a viable long-term solution to this problem. In December, President Barack Obama proposed increasing state-funded aid to make medicine and treatment more affordable to low income AIDS sufferers here in the U.S. Increasing financial aid to those who cannot afford life preserving drugs is just one possible way to address the marketplace irregularity created by U.S. medical patent laws.
Regardless, this is an issue that deserves more attention and discussion this election season and beyond. Getting affordable medicine to those who need it is an issue many Americans can’t wait on.