The battle against illness and disease is a constant one. Incredibly costly long-term research has to be undertaken in order to produce the next generation of drugs, which will combat the viruses, infections and superbugs of the future. The question of who should carry out and fund this research is often debated. I believe that the only sensible approach is a two-pronged strategy, including both private finance and taxpayers’ money.
It makes an enormous amount of sense for the powerful pharmaceutical multi-national conglomerates to be involved. They own laboratories with cutting-edge technology and employ gifted scientists and leading experts in relevant fields. These organizations benefit from literally decades of expertise and have a tremendous incentive to succeed: profit. It may well be that cures for cancer or diabetes are discovered by one of these corporations, leading to an increase in life expectancy and life quality.
However, it must be pointed out that these large firms will only invest in projects when there is a realistic expectation of making money. Therefore, it is essential that the state funds some investigations. Large firms calculate that the financial rewards for developing a cure for malaria, for instance, would be negligible because it is a disease which principally affects poorer members of society who cannot pay for expensive medicines. Thus state-run or even international bodies have to step in. Similarly, only governments are able to invest the almost limitless amounts of time and money necessary for research into some of the most complex diseases. Shareholders in major companies refuse to take such a risk.
As can be seen from the preceding paragraphs, the issue of how to produce the medicines and techniques needed to deal with major diseases is a complicated one. However, there is room for optimism. Politicians and chief executives of multinational companies should be able to collaborate in the fight against serious illnesses.
The battle against illness and
disease
is a constant one.
Incredibly
costly long-term research
has to
be undertaken in order to produce the
next
generation of drugs, which will combat the viruses, infections and
superbugs
of the future. The question of who should carry out and fund this research is
often
debated. I believe that the
only
sensible approach is a two-pronged strategy, including both private finance and taxpayers’ money.
It
makes
an enormous amount of sense for the powerful pharmaceutical multi-national conglomerates to
be involved
. They
own
laboratories with cutting-edge technology and employ gifted scientists and leading experts in relevant fields. These organizations benefit from
literally
decades of expertise and have a tremendous incentive to succeed: profit. It may well be that cures for cancer or diabetes
are discovered
by one of these corporations, leading to an increase in life expectancy and life quality.
However
, it
must
be pointed
out that these large firms will
only
invest in projects when there is a realistic expectation of making money.
Therefore
, it is essential that the state funds
some
investigations. Large firms calculate that the financial rewards for developing a cure for malaria,
for instance
, would be negligible
because
it is a
disease
which
principally
affects poorer members of society who cannot pay for expensive medicines.
Thus
state-run or even international bodies
have to
step in.
Similarly
,
only
governments
are able to invest the almost limitless amounts of time and money necessary for research into
some
of the most complex
diseases
. Shareholders in major
companies
refuse to take such a
risk
.
As can be
seen
from the preceding paragraphs, the issue of how to produce the medicines and techniques needed to deal with major
diseases
is a complicated one.
However
, there is room for optimism. Politicians and chief executives of multinational
companies
should be able to collaborate in the fight against serious illnesses.