4 ms·

"Although not explicitly stated, it will also allow for the patentability of medical diagnostics and innovative pharmaceuticals" How do you patent diagnostics?

• mkempe 8y ago
  Interesting question. What does that have to do with "Koch"? Do you think there are currently no businesses that invented, exclusively make, and control the pricy distribution of specialized diagnostic tools? how does the political philosophy of investors in such corporations change whether a doctor decides additional diagnosis is required? are patients expected to reject diagnosis on the basis of the political thoughts of people who may, or may not, have invested in the relevant pharmaceutical companies? What about the purchase of food and clothes? does the same standard apply?
• mrsteveman1 8y ago
  > "Although not explicitly stated, it will also allow for the patentability of medical diagnostics and innovative pharmaceuticals" The notion that patents are promoting pharmaceutical innovation or improved medical outcomes is absurd at this point, there are medications that are being excluded from the market because they can't be patented despite being well known and in use for decades, while other medications are being brought to market solely because someone managed to obtain a patent. For example Prilosec, which was discovered in 1979 and has been marketed since 1989, is a racemic mixture of (S)-(-)omeprazole and (R)-(+)omeprazole. For an exceptionally simple analogy of what that means: hold your hand in front of your face vertically with all of your fingers together pointing straight up. Now point just your thumb sideways instead. Same hand, same thumb, different configuration, only one of which would fit through the sleeve of a dress shirt. (S)-(-)omeprazole is the one that actually fits, and your body turns (R)-(+)omeprazole into (S)-(-)omeprazole, which causes it to eventually fit as well. Prilosec is now generic and long past the patent term which expired in 2001, is well understood and is on the WHO list of essential medicines. Nexium on the other hand, is (S)-(-)omeprazole by itself, and was able to immediately enter the market when the Prilosec patent expired because the same company patented Nexium 2 years before that happened. Nexium is essentially just Prilosec with an active ingredient removed (the (R)-(+)omeprazole form) rather than added or altered. They claimed it was an improvement over Prilosec, and were able to market it as another more expensive drug, but even that improvement was somewhere between questionable and fabricated according to their own studies. Only 2 out of the 3 studies used by AstraZenica showed an improvement over Prilosec, and they compared 20mg-40mg of Nexium to 20mg of Prilosec, which means they just doubled or quadrupled the dosage of (S)-(-)omeprazole, because 20mg of Nexium is 20mg of (S)-(-)omeprazole, while 20mg of Prilosec is only 10mg of (S)-(-)omeprazole. You could do the same thing by taking 2 Prilosec capsules instead. And that patented decision to remove an active ingredient while misrepresenting the research to justify it was somehow not only "innovative" but should be treated as "private property"? Nonsense.