Apparently sleepy Joe has woken up to the barrier to fighting the virus, it is all those prized intellectual property rights and he wants to abolish them. Big Pharma must be quaking, what next?

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-05-...e-ip/100119704

This is socialism on the march, make no mistake, your precious freedom to make outrageous profits is at risk

And the question to ask is why would a pharmaceutical company spend all the resources and years on R&D to develop a medication that they would not have exclusive patent protection ?
A Tough Road: Cost To Develop One New Drug Is $2.6 Billion; Approval Rate for Drugs Entering Clinical Development is Less Than 12% – Policy & Medicine (policymed.com)

You call it 'outrageous profits' . I call it a fair return on investment . First you call it socialism on the march and then you use a phony socialist cliche .

Tom, dear boy, haven't you heard of sarcasm?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

You call it 'outrageous profits' . I call it a fair return on investment

---

I call it putting millions of lives ahead of profits.

then go right ahead and make the investment in time and capital ....or let mwe guess .you think the taxpayer should foot the bill .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

then go right ahead and make the investment in time and capital

---

It's a CRISIS. Or haven't you noticed?

Quote:

---

or let mwe guess .you think the taxpayer should foot the bill .

---

Paying is secondary to the crisis. Hard to believe you would put money ahead of millions dying.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

then go right ahead and make the investment in time and capital ....or let mwe guess .you think the taxpayer should foot the bill .

---

Taxpayers have already footed the bill. Always have....always will. I doubt Big Pharma looses much money in the long run. They never do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Athos

It's a CRISIS. Or haven't you noticed?

---

Yes we have noticed and there is a difference between abolishing IP rights and directing companies to make technology available on favourable terms

Quote:

---

Paying is secondary to the crisis. Hard to believe you would put money ahead of millions dying.

---

It isn't a matter of money, it is resources and goodwill. This is where the US can earn back much of its prestige since China is doing little to assuage the crisis it caused, but opportunism won't get the job done

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paraclete

Yes we have noticed and there is a difference between abolishing IP rights and directing companies to make technology available on favourable terms

---

What's the difference between protecting IP rights and millions of people dying for that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Athos

What's the difference between protecting IP rights and millions of people dying for that?

---

If you had been following the thread you would know that I'm not against making the drugs available, I just don't like to see creeping socialism effectively nationalising an industry

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paraclete

If you had been following the thread you would know that I'm not against making the drugs available, I just don't like to see creeping socialism effectively nationalising an industry

---

Yeah, I got that. Nobody is nationalizing any industry - that's a stretch. The IP rights are being subjected to the needs of millions. This is an emergency.

love the way crisis is used as a reason to surrender liberties and rights. Bill Gates the leading proponent of global vaccine initiatives opposes IP waivers . The better way to do it is through technology transfer partnerships and licensing agreements, AstraZeneca and the Serum Institute of India, which produced doses for COVAX have such a deal .

Serum Institute of India obtains emergency use authorisation in India for AstraZeneca’s COVID-19 vaccine

All Quid will accomplish is handing over US technology to the Chinese on a silver platter . Hunter is happy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

love the way crisis is used as a reason to surrender liberties and rights.

---

What better reason?

Who defines crisis ? Took Quid a long time to admit he screwed up and created a crisis on the border ,maybe he still does not admit it . And then when does a crisis end ? We still live under crisis laws established after 9-11 that abuse liberties for the 'greater good ' . Claims of urgency continue long after the "crisis " passes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

Who defines crisis

---

Nearly 600,000 dead! I call that a crisis.

Big Pharma has been through this before, a few times and lost nothing. The details and procedures will be worked out like they always have been despite the public posturing, hollering, and handwringing.

the crisis is purely political, leaders must be seen to be doing something, so they create a war, a crisis, then they can be seen to act, but when they do act, they have their critics, their detractors, their opponents

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paraclete

the crisis is purely political, leaders must be seen to be doing something, so they create a war, a crisis, then they can be seen to act, but when they do act, they have their critics, their detractors, their opponents

---

600,000 dead is purely political?

"crisis" is over . There were 2 spikes in deaths ;in April of last year and January this year . The US responded to the "crisis" by using genius of those evil greedy Big Parma companies to create vaccines in record times . Mission accomplished .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

"crisis" is over . There were 2 spikes in deaths ;in April of last year and January this year . The US responded to the "crisis" by using genius of those evil greedy Big Parma companies to create vaccines in record times . Mission accomplished .

---

Crisis is ongoing. To end all safeguards now would be a disaster. Herd immunity is the goal.