Reply to post: Re: For a contrasting view...

Brexit Britain changes its mind, says non, nein, no to Europe's unified patent court – potentially sealing its fate

Loyal Commenter Silver badge

Re: For a contrasting view...

This is a very good point.

I think it boils down to the fact that, unless you have large-scale state-funded pharmaceutical research, then it will be the remit of private enterprise.

Corporations have no moral compass, they exist merely to find the greatest profits and economic growth. Say what you like about capitalism, but this is its biggest flaw; the fact that it is fundamentally amoral, and the reason why you need regulation; also the reason why governments that want to get rid of "red tape" usually want to do so because they are in the pay of (or simply are) those who would profit from deregulation, and not for the public good.

So there are two pretty clear routes to solving the problems of big-pharma - publicly funded, public interest pharmaceutical research (and by all means, this can be for-profit, if that profit goes back into the public coffers), or more and more regulations to rein in the worst behaviours, such as punitive taxation on "lifestyle" drugs, and / or tax breaks for public-interest research.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR WEEKLY TECH NEWSLETTER

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2020