R
ribozyme
Guest
I posed this question has it parallels various threads regarding the morality of “file sharing”, but my variation of this question involves an interesting twist.
I would recommend reading the first posts of this thread first:
forum.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=126289
Some relevant quotes include:
I’ll start by saying the Merck has a promising drug in clinic trials that can be used in “highly active anti-retroviral threapy” in HIV patients. It is called “MK-0518” currently. In clinic trials, this drugs shows great promise. I will redirect you to these sites if you are curious:
natap.org/2005/EACS/eacs_3.htm
thebody.com/thebody/newdrugs.html
medicalnewstoday.com/medicalnews.php?newsid=37591
aidsmeds.com/drugs/MK-0518.htm
As we can see this drug is quite potent as it reduced the viral load of patients in clinic trials by about 100 fold. The mechanism of this drug is that it targets the enzyme integrase in HIV patients preventing the HIV virus from inserting their genetic material in human cells. The beautiful aspect of this drug is that it is an integrase inhibitor, not a reverse transcriptase or protease inhibitor. As in the later classes of drugs, many individuals on highly active anti-retroviral threapy have HIV strains that are resistant to the pleathora of reverse transcriptase inhibitors and protease inhibitors. Integrase inhibitors use a totally different mechanism so it would be unaffected by HIV drug resistance, and taking these drugs usually have adverse side effects. I would imagine, unfortuantely, that if integrase inhibitors become widely used, strains resistant to integrase inhibitors will not be unusal.
Okay, now let’s say in the future this drug has an acceptable risk of side effects and passed clinical trials and Merck tries to sell it. Indeed, Merck will try to make a profit on this drug. Unfortuantely, some people with HIV lack money or the insurance to gain access to this drug. These people will be told “tough luck”, and this, of course, sickens an egalitarian such as myself. Now lets say that there is some other company who knows how to make the exact drug too, but decides to give it away for free. Is it morally wrong to do this? This is somewhat similar to “multiplying loaves of bread” as the company is able to make copious amount of the drug simply by knowing the steps for the organic synthesis of the drug.
Of course, there is an enormous amount of effort need to make this drug as it involves the colloboration of organic chemists (to provide a method of organic synthesis for this drug) ,biochemists (to study the kinetics of this drugs, and to help the drug from interacting with other proteins besides HIV integrase), and the drug must undergo clinic trials. Of course, the people who are developing the drug should be compensated.
I would recommend reading the first posts of this thread first:
forum.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=126289
Some relevant quotes include:
and
But now to the actually question of selling and manufacturing drugs, but first I want to provide some background for my question. If you do not want to read this, then skip to the next few paragraphs (start reading at “Okay, now let’s say”.
I’ll start by saying the Merck has a promising drug in clinic trials that can be used in “highly active anti-retroviral threapy” in HIV patients. It is called “MK-0518” currently. In clinic trials, this drugs shows great promise. I will redirect you to these sites if you are curious:
natap.org/2005/EACS/eacs_3.htm
thebody.com/thebody/newdrugs.html
medicalnewstoday.com/medicalnews.php?newsid=37591
aidsmeds.com/drugs/MK-0518.htm
As we can see this drug is quite potent as it reduced the viral load of patients in clinic trials by about 100 fold. The mechanism of this drug is that it targets the enzyme integrase in HIV patients preventing the HIV virus from inserting their genetic material in human cells. The beautiful aspect of this drug is that it is an integrase inhibitor, not a reverse transcriptase or protease inhibitor. As in the later classes of drugs, many individuals on highly active anti-retroviral threapy have HIV strains that are resistant to the pleathora of reverse transcriptase inhibitors and protease inhibitors. Integrase inhibitors use a totally different mechanism so it would be unaffected by HIV drug resistance, and taking these drugs usually have adverse side effects. I would imagine, unfortuantely, that if integrase inhibitors become widely used, strains resistant to integrase inhibitors will not be unusal.
Okay, now let’s say in the future this drug has an acceptable risk of side effects and passed clinical trials and Merck tries to sell it. Indeed, Merck will try to make a profit on this drug. Unfortuantely, some people with HIV lack money or the insurance to gain access to this drug. These people will be told “tough luck”, and this, of course, sickens an egalitarian such as myself. Now lets say that there is some other company who knows how to make the exact drug too, but decides to give it away for free. Is it morally wrong to do this? This is somewhat similar to “multiplying loaves of bread” as the company is able to make copious amount of the drug simply by knowing the steps for the organic synthesis of the drug.
Of course, there is an enormous amount of effort need to make this drug as it involves the colloboration of organic chemists (to provide a method of organic synthesis for this drug) ,biochemists (to study the kinetics of this drugs, and to help the drug from interacting with other proteins besides HIV integrase), and the drug must undergo clinic trials. Of course, the people who are developing the drug should be compensated.