It can be solved by extending patents in return for lower prices. Then the government must enforce patents internationally by putting pressure on countries that ignore patents.
Another concern is poor quality from knockoff manufacturers. You can partially solve that by lowering costs because the original product becomes more competitive. You can also try to apply pressure on countries that don't honor patents.
You can complain about the cost, but you can't just make pharma companies sell their products for less because you believe they are too expensive. You need to give them a reason to believe that they can continue to sell a good product and make money off of the research investment they put in. You also need to give them incentive not to make small changes to drugs to renew patents when the original version of the drug might be a better version.
Granted, it is sick when people make an excessive amount of money at the expense of those most in need. But, most of the bad that happens in pharma is due to suboptimal patents and suboptimal patent enforcement.
But stronger patent protection won't improve pricing... competition will. I think we should reduce extension patents to 5 years, and possibly even have compulsory licensing fees ($10 per day, per prescription for the first year, $8 for the second ... 6... 4... down to $2, then $1) for prescription drug patents starting at 5 years. And the penalty for an insufficient patent application for a third party to properly apply within the first 8 years would mean a loss of said patent.
What about drugs that cost more than $10 per day to produce? Hell that's only $3650 per year. How many manufacturing plans can sustain themselves on that sort of revenue, particularly if they are creating a drug for a disease that only affects 1000 patients in the world?
One of the reasons why generic drugs prices jumped so much in the last few years, if because manufacturers said "screw this" and just stopped making the drugs because the margins were so low.
The $10/day was for the licensing to the patent holder, not a cap on the cost of the drug to the consumer. This is about reducing patent protections on drugs to 5 years after market, and compulsory license caps after that, in order to encourage competition, not a price cap over production costs in a free market.
Curious about the last part. How does that work? If they make small changes and get patents based on the new formula, won't other companies be allowed to use the original formula?
I'm guessing somehow both formulae are covered by the renewed patent, but that is wrong on so many levels.
It can be solved by extending patents in return for lower prices. Then the government must enforce patents internationally by putting pressure on countries that ignore patents.
Another concern is poor quality from knockoff manufacturers. You can partially solve that by lowering costs because the original product becomes more competitive. You can also try to apply pressure on countries that don't honor patents.
You can complain about the cost, but you can't just make pharma companies sell their products for less because you believe they are too expensive. You need to give them a reason to believe that they can continue to sell a good product and make money off of the research investment they put in. You also need to give them incentive not to make small changes to drugs to renew patents when the original version of the drug might be a better version.
Granted, it is sick when people make an excessive amount of money at the expense of those most in need. But, most of the bad that happens in pharma is due to suboptimal patents and suboptimal patent enforcement.