Ebola was first discovered all the way
back in 1976 and has been part of the public imaginary since the publication of
The Hot Zone by Richard Preston in
1994. There have been 26 outbreaks so far, with the largest until now costing
224 deaths (of 425 infections) in Uganda in 2000-1. We are obviously currently
experiencing the deadliest outbreak in the history of disease ravaging Western
Africa as usual, but spreading to Spain and the U.S., already counting 9,286
incidents and 4,597 fatalities. Yet in those nearly four decades, no drug has
been approved to treat the horrifyingly deadly hemorrhagic disease. Why?
The answer is both obvious and rather
disturbing – profit margins. Pharmaceutical companies deciding where to spend
their research and development funding generally look at the potential for
future revenue streams. And curing or treating diseases in the Global South
(developing and underdeveloped countries in Africa, Southeast Asia and parts of
South America) is just not as profitable as palliatives for Western diseases
and conditions or, at the extreme, making up things like “General Anxiety
Disorder” and “Restless Leg Syndrome” so they can sell even more treatment. In
fact, the pharmaceutical industry made a rather disturbing discovery in the
late 70s – it is substantially more profitable to treat the symptoms of a
condition (palliative) than to actually cure diseases. And thus the explosion
of anti-depressants, EDD drugs a decade later, ADHD treatment (essentially
speed) and the like. New diseases? Just
not as profitable, including new more potent antibiotics to treat the growing
strains of drug-resistant microbes. And while the government has partially or
wholly funded many of the most important patents in the industry for the past
50 years, they appear to have little power to actually influence what the
companies do or how much they ultimately charge for the drugs they do create
that actually save lives.
Diseases that strike the poorer countries
thus receive almost no attention at all. Beyond Ebola, malaria and tuberculosis
(which kill a combined 2 million people a year) receive less attention than
high cholesterol, Chagas, dengue and other “neglected tropical diseases (which
affect a billion people and kill as many as 500k) have 10 marketed drugs of the
over 15,000 that came to market between 75 and today. And the same is the case
in the West, with more drugs targeted toward the middle and upper class, male
over female treatment, and white over minority conditions. One could argue that
this is the natural way that the market works, but is it a just, or even
intelligent, approach to healthcare?
Diseases like Ebola bring this issue into
the public eye and arguably provide an opportunity for a broader debate about
the pharmaceutical industry and its priorities and near monopoly over life on
the planet. Unfortunately, in the contemporary media moment, we are more likely
to hear the Obama administration somehow blamed for the minor outbreak (and,
given sufficient time, maybe for the disease itself (as a young Muslim visiting
Africa)). But forgoing the bigger issue
for a moment, what can be done to stem a disease that could kill millions? Do
we simply accept that a pandemic could ravage human populations not only in the
poorest countries but across the globe? Do we hope the CDC can control the
growing dangers of rare diseases showing up inside our borders, given the
continued expansion of globalization? Or can national government or
international bodies find a way to push companies to find a cure? Two
possibilities exist to address this troubling situation: 1. Subsidize research
into potential cures or 2. Create a competition. It turns out, the later is the
better option, as long as the competition is perceived as fair and the rewards
are large enough to create sufficient incentive. (The New
Yorker).
Let’s hope the U.S. government and global
bodies start to create these incentive programs, not only for Ebola but for all
of the biggest healtcare issues facing humanity today. Don’t hold your breath …
or maybe, do!
No comments:
Post a Comment