Search the archive.

Americans spend more on prescription drugs than anyone else in the world. It’s true that they take a lot of pills. But what really has set the US apart is how much drugs cost. Unlike in most other countries, their prices are set without direct government intervention. A new law aims to change that for certain drugs for elderly and disabled patients who rely on the government’s Medicare health program. The pharmaceutical industry opposes the change, and the law faces a raft of lawsuits seeking to stop it from taking effect.

How US Prices Compare Internationally

The pharmaceutical industry’s decline over the past year is the result of a 13-point drop in Republicans’ positive score, from 26% to 13%. This spans a period when some leading Republicans and conservative figures have been critical of the pharmaceutical industry generally, and of COVID-19 vaccines and booster shots specifically.

Republicans’ positive rating of the industry had surged to 45% in 2020 as pharmaceutical companies worked with the Trump administration to accelerate the deployment of COVID-19 vaccines. Even before that, Republicans’ positive view of the industry averaged 37% (from 2001 to 2019), nearly three times the current level. Democrats’ ratings of pharma averaged 31% across the same period, only slightly higher than today.

Americans' perception of the pharmaceutical industry is at its lowest point this century, especially among Republican voters, as the initial support for COVID-related efforts has turned into disillusionment.

That’s according to the latest Gallup industry reputation poll, which surveyed people across the U.S. throughout August on how they viewed the leading industries.

[Kenneth, 07/15/2024, Coalition for a Prosperous America, “Drug Shortages Increase Odds Of Patient Death; More Than Half Of Drugs In Short Supply For Over 12 Months.,” https://prosperousamerica.org/drug-shortages-increase-odds-of-patient-death-more-than-half-of-drugs-in-short-supply-for-over-12-months/, accessed: 07/15/2024, shl]

Drug shortages are becoming commonplace in the U.S. Data from a new pharmaceutical industry tracking firm, Qyobo, shows hundreds of drugs are still in short supply – some well over a year — and our dependence on imports grows, including from labs on the receiving end of lackluster FDA inspections.

[Fraiser, 04/11/2024, Fierce Pharma, “Number of ongoing US drug shortages reaches new high, pharmacist group says,” https://www.fiercepharma.com/pharma/us-drug-shortages-reach-all-time-high-2001-according-ashp, accessed: 07/16/2024, shl]

As lawmakers, biopharma companies and others try to stabilize vulnerable pharma supply chains, drug shortages have become about as bad as they’ve ever been in the U.S.

[Nick, 07/16/2024, The Washington Times, “A perfect storm for drug shortages in U.S.,” https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2024/jul/10/perfect-storm-for-drug-shortages-in-us/, accessed: 07/16/2024, shl]

OPINION:

[Jonathan B. Warner, University of Indiana School of Law, “Using Global Themes to Reframe the Bioprospecting Debate, https://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1340&context=ijgls DOA 7/2/24, MP]

Despite the serious concerns of neocolonialism and loss of biodiversity, there also may be significant positive effects of bioprospecting." Bioprospecting allows those who are in the best economic position to disseminate valuable information to do so uninhibited.59 For example, as many as four-fifths of all drugs have their basis in natural plant resources.6 " Hence, this use of broad intellectual property protection may increase the likelihood of finding and distributing medicinal cures.61 Such cures could especially improve quality of life for indigenous persons.6 2 In addition, it can be argued that bioprospecting breaks down the North South divide, which tends to separate developed and undeveloped countries, and establishes incentives to preserve the world's biodiversity. Bioprospecting creates economic incentives for large and wealthy businesses to invest in protecting the world's biodiversity to assure that valuable resources are not lost.63 Further, knowing that bioresources in themselves may be valuable to developed nations, southern nations may be able to establish a system of protection for domestic resources.6 This system of protection could dramatically increase southern bargaining power and help dissolve the North-South divide.

The devastating impact of COVID-19 has highlighted global vulnerabilities to high-consequence biological events. The international community was woefully unprepared for a pandemic that has led to millions of deaths and trillions of dollars in economic losses, and has upended daily life. However, notwithstanding the severe damage caused by COVID-19, it should be viewed as a warning shot.1 It will not be the last pandemic humanity faces, and the next high-consequence biological event could be as destructive or substantially worse.

We define global catastrophic biological risks (GCBRs) as biological events of tremendous scale that could cause severe damage to human civilization, potentially jeopardizing its long-term survival.2 The Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security has also developed a working definition of GCBRs,3 and this term is part of a broader discussion about global catastrophic risks that could arise from a variety of sources, including nuclear war, anthropogenic climate change, and advanced artificial intelligence that has not been sufficiently safeguarded.4,5 GCBRs could be caused by a naturally emerging infectious disease outbreak, an accidental release of a pathogen, or a deliberate attack. Naturally emerging infectious disease outbreaks that can grow into pandemics are likely to increase in frequency due to urbanization, globalization, and environmental degradation, and the world faces an increasing risk of high-consequence biological events resulting from accidental or deliberate misuse of the tools of modern bioscience and biotechnology.6-8 Not all outbreaks or global pandemics will grow to the scale of a GCBR as we define it in this article and as others have defined global catastrophic risks more broadly, because the threshold for this type of event is extremely high.

*some text of the card has been edited for gender inclusivity*

Hannah, 27/08/2020, Proclinical, ‘Why are pharmaceutical companies so important?’, https://www.proclinical.com/blogs/2020-8/why-are-pharmaceutical-companies-important, Accessed July 16, 2024, CT

*some text of the card has been edited for gender inclusivity*

Hannah, 27/08/2020, Proclinical, ‘Why are pharmaceutical companies so important?’, https://www.proclinical.com/blogs/2020-8/why-are-pharmaceutical-companies-important, Accessed July 16, 2024, CT

Bradley, 5-15-2020, FastCompany, ‘In defense of Big Pharma, the innovation engine we love to hate’, , Accessed July 16, 2024, CT

It’s easy to hate Big Pharma. Drug prices are absurdly high compared to the rest of the world. Executive salaries can be stomach-churning. Lobbyists treat Washington like it’s their own personal client state. To any sentient observer, it appears the biomedical industry has gotten greedy.

Sonja and Carolina, May 2020, Rand, ‘Pharmaceutical Innovation for Infectious Disease Management’, https://www.rand.org/pubs/perspectives/PEA407-1.html, Accessed July 16, 2024, CT

We need to ensure scalable and sustainable approaches for pharmaceutical innovation in response to infectious disease threats to public health.

[Andy, 05-18-2021, Stat News, “Luck is not a strategy: The world needs to start preparing now for the next pandemic,” https://www.statnews.com/2021/05/18/luck-is-not-a-strategy-the-world-needs-to-start-preparing-now-for-the-next-pandemic/, 07-16-2024, LHG]

As countries grapple with the worst global pandemic in a century, it’s hard to think about preparing for the next one. But if we don’t, it could be worse than Covid-19.

Patent law is a “one-size-fits-all system,” which does not distinguish inventions and associated rights based on technology.100 Patent law also does not address the problem of balancing incentivization against the need for equitable access. In providing incentives for innovation, the existing system does not differentiate between luxury goods and life-saving drugs, effectively prioritizing private over public interest.

B. Evaluating the Costs and Benefits of the Patent System

The patent system has long been criticized for limiting access to pharmaceuticals. Patents grant inventors a limited period of exclusivity with an attempt to allow recoupment of investments in the invention process. In the pharmaceutical industry, this exclusivity and the resulting lack of competition leads to exorbitant prices. High prices limit access to potentially life-saving medicines and hinder achievement of the “highest attainable standard of health,” which several international instruments recognize as a human right.

[John K. Reid, Special Projects/Technology Editor, 3rd year Oklahoma College of Law student, 1-1-2009, American Indian Law Review, Volume 34, Number 1, “Biopiracy: The Struggle for Traditional Knowledge Rights,” , 6-30-24, EP] 

Biopiracy has become a growing problem due to the soaring sales of pharmaceuticals. The value of the world market for medicinal plants found by following leads given by indigenous and local communities has been estimated to be $43 billion.' Obtaining traditional knowledge increases the efficiency of the screening process for plants with medicinal properties by more than four hundred percent,' which is why Indigenous peoples' knowledge is so valuable. Without formal legal protection for indigenous communities, biopiracy is often a shortcut to massive profits without having to provide fair compensation to the original sources of the information.

The use of traditional knowledge in the initial stages of biopharmaceutical research reduces the time and cost of developing products.15 This practice is called “ethnopharmacology” or “ethnomedicine,” and more companies have adopted this approach because of the increase in efficiency.16 A 2004 study analyzing the role 9. Samuel Lim, An Equitable Approach to Traditional Knowledge Protection, 53 N.Y.U. J. INT’L L. & POL. 135, 141 (2020); Intellectual Property and Bioprospecting, supra note 5, at 260. 10. Intellectual Property and Bioprospecting, supra note 5, at 260. 11. Id. 12. Id. 13. Id. 14. See id. at 259, 274. 15. Aman Gebru, Patents, Disclosure, and Biopiracy, 96 DENV. L. REV. 535, 550 (2019) [hereinafter Patents, Disclosure, and Biopiracy]. 16. Id. at 549-50. of traditional knowledge in modern medicine found that the use of traditional knowledge increased the probability of getting a “preliminary hit” from 6% without relying on traditional knowledge, to 25% with use of traditional knowledge.17 Another study found that 80% of plant-derived compounds tested were used for the same ethnomedical purposes as the developed drug.18 The usefulness of traditional knowledge in the initial stages of drug development has been repeatedly proven.19 “The trial and error from the centuries-old use of biodiversity resources by communities has been serving as a diverse pool upon which biopharmaceutical firms build to develop modern drugs.”20 Evidence of this success can be found in the attempt to find a cure for acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS).21 In search for a cure, a New York researcher conducted a field study in the Belize rainforest.22 He compared a random collection of plant species with plants used by the local community for medicinal purposes.23 Out of twenty plants gathered based on the local people’s knowledge, five of them killed the AIDS virus.24 Out of eighteen plants collected randomly, only one killed the AIDS virus.25 Although the plant itself requires more development for it to be used as a drug, the knowledge provided by the local community facilitates the research that leads to the innovation. 26

[Gloria, 3/21/2023, Drake University Law School, “PIRACY BY PATENTS: HOW UNITED STATES PATENT LAW ENABLES BIOPIRACY”, https://aglawjournal.wp.drake.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/66/2023/03/Soto-Ready-for-Publish.pdf , 6/27/24, LHG] 

The biopharmaceutical companies earn billions in annual profits from their protected invention while the people who provided the traditional knowledge on which that research is based, receive no compensation.9 The knowledge provided by indigenous people and local communities are considered to be part of the public domain because it was developed over generations.10 This means inventors can use the traditional knowledge without any legal requirement to provide attribution or benefits to the source communities.11 

[Aman, University of Houston law center member of the institute for intellectual property and information law, June 30 2019, Denver Law Review, “PATENTS, DISCLOSURE, AND BIOPIRACY”, https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3188311, Accessed July 02 2024, AMH]

A. The Value & Loss of TK Resources92

Despite patent expirations that will weigh heavy later in the decade, the pharma industry is on course for solid growth in both sales and earnings, according to analysts at TD Cowen.

Cumulatively, the analysts expect Big Pharma's sales to grow at 4% annually and earnings per share to grow at 7% annually. The projections cover more than a dozen leading drug companies and extend from 2023 to 2030.