Looking into it, according to http://www.drugpatentwatch.com/ultimate/tradename/CUPRIMINE http://www.drugpatentwatch.com/ultimate/tradename/CUPRIMINE, Cuprimine

Looking into it, according to http://www.drugpatentwatch.com/ultimate/tradename/CUPRIMINE http://www.drugpatentwatch.com/ultimate/tradename/CUPRIMINE, Cuprimine is not covered by patents, so all the talk about intellectual property and evil patents is moot point. We have 2 main competing interests. 1. Creation of new treatments 2. Affordability of treatments At the same time, we should have a minimum burden on the free market in terms of regulation. I believe we can do this with the following. 1. For all non-patent drugs, Medicare signs a 5 year contract to supply the drug at a given cost. This will allow off-patent drugs to be available for low expense. 2. For drugs covered by patent, Medicare should negotiate a price based on differential Quality adjusted life year, with the price per quality adjusted life year set by law. For example, if we set the price for quality adjusted life year to $100,000, then Medicare should pay up to $100,000 for a treatment that gives a person 1 quality adjusted life year. Drug companies are allowed to sell to others and negotiate a private sales without other regulation on what price they charge. I want the pharmaceutical industry to be one with outlandish rewards because I want very smart people to be thinking outside the box and taking risks with they try in pursuit of cures for disease. Even the rewards to life-saving medication should have outlandish rewards. If we continue to see outrage at pharma about the price of life-saving treatments (see Solvida), we will see companies shift resources away from such treatments to more elective drugs such as sexual enhancements, requiring less sleep, etc where they can still have great rewards without the moralizing by critics.