The NYT discussed the debate over providing extensive periods of data exclusivity to biotech drugs in order to prevent generic competition. As the article notes, prescriptions of biotech often sell for tens of thousands of dollars per year.
While the article discusses the debate over the best length for periods of exclusivity, it does not ever discuss alternatives to patent financing for pharmaceutical research. As the price of drugs diverge further from their marginal cost of production, the inefficiency of the patent system gets much larger. (The inefficiency increases in proportion to the square of the gap between the patent protected price of the drug and the free market price.) Therefore it would be reasonable to discuss alternatives, such as direct public funding or the prize system advocated by Nobel Laurette Joe Stiglitz, in the context of very expensive drugs.
If you enjoyed this article, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. For over 30 years, The American Prospect has delivered independent reporting that exposes corporate power, investigates political corruption, and analyzes threats to our democracy. Unlike many media outlets, we’re not owned by billionaires or corporations—we’re powered by readers like you.
Today’s independent journalism faces unprecedented challenges. Your support makes our reporting possible and keeps our work free and accessible to all. Whether it’s $5 or $50, every contribution helps sustain our nonprofit newsroom.
Join our community of supporters and make a donation today to help keep independent journalism thriving.
Copyright 2025 | The American Prospect, Inc. | All Rights Reserved
