High drug prices are modeled and an existential threat to public health (HIV) and global development.

Today, the world faces a fundamental dilemma in balancing the interests of patent owners, the public's right to health, and the beneficaries in the most need-the poor. Scientific and technological changes have accelerated and changed the way society approaches public health. Society cites the millennial idea that rapid changes are self-healing and assumes that such advancements immediately provide an "enhanced ability to overcome problems related to poverty and poor health."Is The globe has expanded its technological and economic potential, hoping to strike a balance between the rise of technology and finding a solution to the current health issues. The apparent upside of recent innovations are the associated new medicines and treatments that bear life-saving potential. The down-side, of course, is the high price tag of such innovations.

The reasons for lack of access to essential medicines are numerous and diverse. Available literature suggests that this issue is largely due to inadequate public expenditures, insufficient health coverage, deficient supply of essential medicines, and inflated drug prices.19 Other reasons include storage problems, substandard drug quality, inappropriate selection of drugs, inefficient use of drugs, and inadequate protection of the public's health.? Though, one argument not often discussed is the effect international patent protection may have on access to affordable medicines.21

Intellectual property rights and ownership have also expanded drastically in the last few decades. The nature of the trend is clear: exclusive rights over information have become broader in protection, deeper in granting robust rights, and more severe in enforcing liability against infringers.23 Thus, what effect does strong intellectual property protection have on its beneficiaries, particularly those in least developed countries?

At first blush, there is no discernable overlap between intellectual property and poverty. There is, however, an immediate need to recognize the correlation between the two vastly different areas and the tension created by this relationship. This necessitates a dialogue involving patent-related barriers to access. Therefore, this comment asserts that public health access is patently limited by intellectual property protection. Specifically, patent protection in the pharmaceutical sector acts as a barrier to the developing world's access to essential medicines.

1. The Public Health Perspective: Praying for Palliatives

There is inequality in the access to medicine, specifically in re-source-poor countries. Globally, developing countries account for a small fraction of the pharmaceutical market, whereas high-income countries make up for 80.3% of global pharmaceutical expendi-tures.25 An example of this specific divide is the AIDS26 crisis. The AIDS pandemic, just shy of its fortieth anniversary, remains prevalent since the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's ("CDC") announcement of this "mysterious new disease" back in 1981.27

A patient who tests positive for HIV has the potential to contract the AIDS disease.As the HIV virus grows in an infected person, it weakens the immune system and the patient becomes susceptible to other infections.29 When a patient loses a significant number of immune cells, the human body cannot fight off infections and diseases, and opportunistic infectious agents take advantage of the patient's weak immune system, and he becomes vulnerable to AIDS.3 The mystery behind this disease lies in the appearance of the body visibly looking and feeling healthy, but in fact, is infected and weakened by the disease.31

The most reliable way to know one's status is to be tested for

HIV.32 An estimated 15% of the people infected with HIV in the United States are unaware of their status.33 About 36.7 million people live with HIV/AIDS worldwide, and the majority do not know they are part of this statistic.34 Unawareness raises concerning issues: anyone infected with HIV can infect other people (absent any symptoms) through certain body fluids such as "blood, semen, vaginal secretions, and breast milk."35 If the HIV-infected fluids enter the bloodstream of another person, then that person joins in on the statistic.36

The HIV virus does not discriminate in the type of person it in-fects, although it is more commonplace in the developing world. 37 Fortunately, in developed countries, such as the United States, an HIV-positive status is no longer viewed as a death sentence.38 Devel oped countries have had access to a combination of antiretrovirals to help alleviate suffering since 1995.39 This combination aided death prevention from this once fatal disease. This treatment, known as the"AIDS Cocktail," can drastically improve the health and life expectancy of a patient. 10 The "daily cocktail of antiretroviral medication transformed HIV/AIDS into a 'treatable and chronic condition for individuals who can afford the treatment. "11 Conversely, the least developed countries have not been quite as fortunate in obtaining such access, emphasis on the 'who can afford' the treatment. As a result, people in developing countries do not receive access to the expensive AIDS treatments, 12 and this early death sentence is evident in present day. Thus, adequate access to such drug treatment in developing countries can transform AIDS into a treatable disease rather than add to the decimating toll. 43

Furthermore, access to drug treatment is particularly important because the cure to HIV/AIDS has yet to be found. Until a safe, effective, and affordable AIDS vaccine is discovered, health professionals can only continue to promote utilizing prevention methods in avoiding HIV/AIDS and various treatments in alleviating suffering that is associated with this disease.

While scientific advancements work toward a cure, the crux of health-related human rights relies on the access to effective drug treat-ment. 15 However, pharmaceutical companies and other proponents of patent law have cited "poverty" as an excuse for lack of sustainable access. 16 Again, the illogic "poverty, not patents" argument distracts lawmakers from any intellectual property-based barrier argument. 17