Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

A new approach to pharmaceutical innovations

By Thomas Pogge - posted Tuesday, 21 June 2005


Because much of the plan’s cost would be borne by the more affluent countries, it must be supportable by moral and prudential arguments that their citizens would find compelling. The best moral arguments appeal to the catastrophic effects of the present system. By granting monopolies for advanced medicines, this system prevents market competition that would dramatically reduce the price of these medicines and thereby make them more widely accessible. To preserve such monopoly rewards, millions of poor people are paying with their lives. These great ongoing harms are foreseeable. And they are avoidable, as is shown by the enhanced patent regime I have sketched. In order to encourage the development of new medicines, we do not need to violate the human rights of the global poor by denying them access to life-saving drugs at competitive market prices.

Six significant prudential considerations further recommend the reform to citizens of the affluent countries. It would gain us much goodwill in the developing world, would create high-value jobs in pharmaceutical research, and would dramatically lower the cost of patented essential drugs and of medical insurance also in our more affluent countries.

In addition, more rapidly increasing medical knowledge combined with a stronger and more diversified arsenal of medical interventions would facilitate more effective responses to public health problems in the future and would reduce the danger our affluent societies face from invasive diseases. The 2003 SARS outbreak illustrates both points: dangerous diseases can rapidly transit from poor-country settings into cities in the industrialised world (Toronto); and the current neglect of the medical needs of poor populations leaves us unprepared to deal with such problems when we are suddenly confronted with them.

Advertisement

Last, not least, we stand to realise great personal and social gains from working with others, nationally and internationally, toward overcoming the pre-eminent problem of our age: the horrendous and largely avoidable morbidity and mortality among the global poor.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. All

For a more detailed explication and defence of the reform proposal, see Thomas Pogge: “Human Rights and Global Health: A Research Program,” in Christian Barry and Thomas Pogge, eds.: Global Institutions and Responsibilities, special issue of Metaphilosophy 36/1-2 (January 2005).



Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Since receiving his PhD in philosophy from Harvard, Thomas Pogge has been teaching moral and political philosophy and Kant at Columbia University. He is currently at the Centre for Applied Philosophy and Public Ethics at the Australian National University.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Thomas Pogge

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Photo of Thomas Pogge
Article Tools
Comment Comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy