The Post had an article this morning reporting on an experimental cancer treatment in China which a pharmaceutical company in the United States claims is "stolen." While there is an important issue about safety standards (China is almost certainly far more lax than the United States), this is an interesting example of how patents can impede the development of new drugs.
Assuming the the U.S. firm is correct in its claim that the Chinese company is infringing on its patents (this is disputed), then effective patent enforcement would have prevented the Chinese firm from advancing research on this form of treatment. Science advances most quickly when results are fully public and all researchers are allowed to carry through research that they deem important. In a world where the quest for patent monopolies closes off large areas to researchers, medicine will almost certainly advance less quickly than in a world in which all research is fully public.
Unlike many news organizations, the Prospect has remained staunchly committed to keeping our journalism free and accessible to all. We believe that independent journalism is crucial for a functioning democracy—but quality reporting comes at a cost.
This year, we’re aiming to raise $75,000 to continue delivering the hard-hitting investigative journalism you’ve come to expect from us. Your support helps us maintain our independence and dig deeper into the stories that matter most.
If you value our reporting, please consider making a contribution today. Any amount helps secure our future and ensure we can continue holding power to account.
