We have already found proven that Big Pharma suffers from innovation in drug development therefore the expected reaction from Big Pharma side is just to simulate the innovation process. The suffering is not obvious and it is masked. It is hard to imagine that Big Pharma could directly prohibit any innovative drug development but it DOES slow down the process indirectly by:
- Establishing oversimplified inefficient paradigm
- Creating regulatory barriers
But the pharmaceutical market has to be changed – slowly or faster, and novel products have to be developed due to the demand is huge and always unmet! So we have identified a counter-party for Big Pharma. This is objective and non-personal constant demand of the people to be healthy and their willing to pay extra for better products. What about politicians? Well, I think they can play on both sides: they can be “motivated” by both electorate and Big Pharma. Scientists? The same situation – Big Pharma can simply buy them if they aren't already involved in Big Pharma activity and/or Big Pharma is afraid their activity.
On the other hand there is fantastic possibility for the scientists (material, emotional and existential) if they try to challenge Big Pharma. And the more the tension between people's demand for the better products and willingness of Big Pharma to slow down innovation, the more home-run scores can a scientist or businessman or another kind of challenger takes!
And what should be done for that? Change the current vicious paradigm! In which way? This is another question: I simply do not know which or who's paradigm works better but I believe that it's just a question on time. Scientists are par excellence deconstructors of any false science and bogus concepts – as soon as they understand the situation they will find the solution! But what we are waiting for? A REAL SCIENTIST to come!
No comments:
Post a Comment