-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Tim Bates tbates@karri.bhs.mq.edu.au Wrote:
>The enormous bulk of this cost is for regulatory compliance and marketing
>Dithc the regulations and hte cost is minimal
I hate the FDA as much as anyone but that is a huge exaggeration. The average non generic drug company spends more than twice as much on research as a computer company of the same size. FDA or no FDA, any big company that is not suicidal had better make damn sure that it's product doesn't kill more people than it saves.
>Critically, you ignore the power of branding. If what you say was
>correct, Philip Morris would not be the 100 billion dollar company
>which it is. Nor would Coca Cola.
>In a non-patent & non-FDA world, without having carried out product
>safety tests for themselves, any generic rip-offs would expose themselves
>to product liability.
Why reinvent the wheel? If a reputable drug company conducts safety tests there is no need to repeat them. Besides, I can make this stuff in my garage, go ahead and sue me, you can't get blood out of a turnip.
>Get rid of the FDA and the barrier to generics would raise substantially.
I'd love to dump the FDA, but I don't follow you here.
>Well, many of us might argue that cheap drugs by the tonne is a good thing.
>The Cisco chair simply believes that patents are not the way to do business.
John K Clark jonkc@att.net
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.5.5
iQA/AwUBNtD259+WG5eri0QzEQJpOQCgt+YySLyyCllcH25zjY+GGJjOg8MAnj9Z
ReMlZTy/RKljpBhnS1OVqLP2
=yyJ+
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----