5 ms·
> As a university, they have no business being in the medical products business. Why? While this line of reasoning might carry some weight if Northwestern wer
by jmj42 14y ago
> As a university, they have no business being in the medical products business.
Why? While this line of reasoning might carry some weight if Northwestern were a public university (though I'd still require some convincing), Northwestern is a private non-profit institution, with a highly ranked medical school and clinic.
Supplementing their income with drug sales instead of higher tuition seem like a perfectly logical thing to do.
- tptacek 14y agoBecause it's a waste. Pfizer has the comparative advantage in marketing drugs, and NWU in researching them. Econ 101: both parties are better off trading.
- betterunix 14y ago...and how does the patent help this? It sounds you had researchers paid on a grant, and a drug company that sold the fruits of that research. I am not seeing the case for a patent here at all.
- tptacek 14y agoYour dislike of patents does not make NWU a better venue for drug marketing.
- RestlessMind 14y agoHere is a case for patent: a third company snoops in, replicates drugs and sells for higher profit / lower cost since they haven't invested in R&D. Sounds unfair to me and such behavior should be prevented. Patents is one solution. Do you have a better one?
- betterunix 14y agoSo let me see if I understand you correctly: grant money pays for the research, one company swoops in and markets the drug, then a third company swoops in and markets it, and you think that is a problem?
- tptacek 14y agoYes, because the first "company that swooped in and marketed the drug" paid for the privilege.
- betterunix 14y agoHow so? Grant money comes from the government, not some private company.
- noahl 14y agoI think I understand what you're saying. Yes, I agree that research funded by the public should be freely available (definitely unpatentable, and maybe uncopyrightable too). I think this is a separate issue, though. If Northwestern did the research with its own money (which does sometimes happen, I think), then it is good that Pfizer had to pay Northwestern for the research, because this funds more research. The patent is just the legal mechanism that makes Pfizer have to pay as opposed to getting the research for free.
- jonpeda 14y agoNot necessarily. NWU is a private university, and in general plenty of private companies fund research. In some cases, the government funding issue is relevant. Not in all cases.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]