Should Medical Treatments be Patented?
October 19, 2023Feature Article(Source)
Over the decades, hospital visits and medications have become more and more expensive for the average American. This problem has become such a dilemma for the United States that people often cannot pay for their life-saving medication and affordable healthcare is a hot-button issue for presidential administrations. While insurance companies, lack of regulation over medication prices, etc., all contribute to this issue, there is another problem: the existence of medical patents that contribute to a rise in medication costs. Beyond money, patents have raised several other issues within the medical community.
What is a patent? Patents are a form of intellectual property rights, which are often treated similarly to other property rights. 35 USC Section 101, also known as the patent-eligibility doctrine, states that “any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof” may be eligible for a patent. Patents for one’s invention or discovery protect the idea; they grant the patent-holder exclusive rights over their invention. For example, suppose a doctor discovers a new combination of synthetic compounds and living organisms that creates a treatment for cancer; if they patent this new discovery, the doctor is able to prevent anyone who tries to market or sell the product without their permission.
Patents and the medical field have a long history with each other. This relationship may seem straightforward and mutually beneficial; however, there have been controversial patents within the medical field and controversies related to the effects patents have on the medical field. Should inventors be able to exclude others from distributing medical treatments? Should medical treatments be guarded when doing so may negatively affect the health of others?
On one hand, patents help promote innovation. Consider the earlier example of the doctor inventing a new treatment for cancer: if the doctor knew they would not be able to patent their work at all, what incentive would they have to invent the treatment in the first place? Patents guarantee that inventors are rewarded for their hard work and are the only ones able to benefit from their medical discovery. Medical treatments can take billions of dollars and decades to develop. Incentivizing medical companies and scientists to create these treatments is part of the reason why we have life-saving medications for numerous illnesses today.
However, there are several arguments against allowing medical treatments to be patentable. Generic drug companies argue that brand-name companies have weaponized the patent system by slightly changing molecules to extend their monopolies, thereby increasing their profits at the expense of those buying the medication. Further, studies have shown that the modern patent system discourages companies from investing in preventive or curative drugs, such as vaccines or antibiotics; these are still important drugs that should be developed. There is also the morality perspective: shouldn’t our society prioritize affordable medical care? Why should we even consider company profits and promoting innovation when insulin is hundreds of dollars more expensive in the United States than other countries?
There is no simple solution to this issue. Scientists need to be motivated to invent the next medical breakthrough, but the current system needs to change for affordable medical treatments to be a realistic possibility for the next generation. Perhaps altering the patent system is the way to accomplish this goal.
Suggested Citation: Saron Araya, Should Medical Treatments be Patented?, Cornell J.L. & Pub. Pol’y, The Issue Spotter (October 19, 2023), https://live-journal-of-law-and-public-policy.pantheonsite.io/should-medical-treatments-be-patented/.
You may also like
- November 2024
- October 2024
- April 2024
- March 2024
- February 2024
- November 2023
- October 2023
- April 2023
- March 2023
- February 2023
- January 2023
- December 2022
- November 2022
- October 2022
- May 2022
- April 2022
- March 2022
- February 2022
- January 2022
- December 2021
- November 2021
- October 2021
- May 2021
- April 2021
- March 2021
- February 2021
- January 2021
- November 2020
- October 2020
- September 2020
- August 2020
- July 2020
- June 2020
- May 2020
- April 2020
- March 2020
- February 2020
- January 2020
- November 2019
- October 2019
- September 2019
- April 2019
- February 2019
- December 2018
- November 2018
- October 2018
- September 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
- December 2017
- November 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016
- February 2016
- January 2016
- December 2015
- November 2015
- October 2015
- June 2015
- May 2015
- April 2015
- March 2015
- February 2015
- January 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- August 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- September 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- June 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010