Talking to someone the other day about copyright and patents, she asked the standard question that if big companies couldn't protect their markets, how could th

Talking to someone the other day about copyright and patents, she asked the standard question that if big companies couldn't protect their markets, how could they pay for research into new drugs. I countered that most increases of quality of life and longevity come from what you said -- basic knowledge of the value of exercise, nutrition, and sleep -- though I haven't researched it deeply. The money going for all this drug research and prescriptions comes from somewhere. Whether directly related or not, schools could use more money for recess, gym, teaching nutrition, and healthy lunches. I expect the return (in quality of life and longevity) on investing in improving school programs to teach such things would surpass what you get from investments (such as by creating limited monopolies) in drug research, and you wouldn't get the side effects (no pun intended) from the monopolies like this article suggested of marketing to people to buy drugs to fix what exercise, sleep, and diet would for free. I'm not saying never give patents for drugs, but evidence like the article's, combined with knowing the value of diet, exercise, and sleep that we aren't teaching and practicing, suggests the net value of public support for drug research is not as high as you'd expect and could even be negative. Anecdotally, I feel my regular exercise, regular sleep, and healthy diet create a stable foundation for me to enjoy my life much more than when I didn't have them.