View Single Post
Old 12-21-2011, 08:17 AM   #31
luqmaninbmore
Da'i
luqmaninbmore ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.luqmaninbmore ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.luqmaninbmore ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.luqmaninbmore ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.luqmaninbmore ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.luqmaninbmore ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.luqmaninbmore ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.luqmaninbmore ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.luqmaninbmore ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.luqmaninbmore ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.luqmaninbmore ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
luqmaninbmore's Avatar
 
Posts: 1,144
Karma: 1217499
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Baltimore
Device: Toshiba Thrive, Kobo Touch, Kindle 1, Aluratek Libre, T-Mobile Comet
Quote:
Originally Posted by HarryT View Post
This is just plain wrong. R&D costs for drugs are astronomical, and the only reason that the drugs companies can afford to spend those sums is because patent law gives them the right to exclusivity for a limited period, thus allowing them a reasonable return on investment. If you think that that R&D could continue in the absence of patent protection, you're living in a fantasy world.
Evidence? And are they astronomical in spite of patent law or _because_ of patent law? And are those astronomical costs distributed evenly across the industry or concentrated in certain areas, some of which may not be of any major consequence to the majority of people? As a matter of perspective if the governments of the world can afford to engage in space exploration, build particle accelerators, etc., what would prevent them from taking on R and D costs for medical research into vital areas? The rise in taxes could be compensated by the lower cost of pharmaceutical products.
luqmaninbmore is offline   Reply With Quote