If you could demand one innovation of the pharmaceutical industry what would it be? Treatment and cures for HIV, one of the world's deadliest and most prevalent diseases? Better diagnostics so that you won't have to be so worried about your doctor's choice of medication? Perhaps a more personalized health care system that chooses the absolute most effective medication for you through your genetic code?
Would you like to know the best part of this choice? It isn't one. Every single one of the options listed above are in the pipelines of major pharmaceutical companies world-wide. Our choice as consumers is all about where we want to put our money. We could choose to invest in a homegrown giant like Pfizer, who's ambitions are all about finding the next "hot" drug to put on the market in order to make the lives of the middle class more fruitful and trouble-free. We could choose to send our money overseas to Switzerland and invest in their powerhouse drug company, Roche Holding, which is currently working on a chip which identifies the genetic make up of patients and thereby judges which medications will be most effective. Or, we could start small and invest in Gilead Sciences, a firm whose main innovative goal is the create the most effective possible treatment for HIV and make that treatment accessible all around the world. Each of these goals can (and hopefully will) be accomplished by the major players in the pharmaceuticals industry, but which can you put your money behind? Which cause should come first is all about where our priorities lie as consumers.
Pfizer, the number one pharmaceutical corporation in the world, is running out of patents. Their name brand drugs like Lipitor are fading one by one into generics, and Pfizer is feeling the crunch. The company has responded in two ways: cutting costs and maintaining a budget of over 6 billion dollars per year on research and development. All that money forged many promising opportunities for the firm, and few are in doubt of their profit potential at this point, yet, how much is a new Lipitor worth to us as a society? I don't think we live in a world where making sure our high cholesterol (which we caused ourselves by the way) should be the priority. Pfizer isn't getting my money.
Roche Holding has made some big commitments. They're promising us implants which can look into our genetic code and thereby cater to our specific medical needs. They're putting forth bold new proposals which would change the way diagnostics work forever and vowing to use the 1% of the current time budget currently appropriated to testing in a more efficient, and best of all, patient friendly way. They're making sure that the middle class consumer is taken care of, that we don't get Alzheimers as much, that we suffer less inconvenience and wrong guesses at the doctors, and that our cancers won't go undetected. Those are some fantastic goals for the average American consumer, but Roche isn't getting my money either.
Gilead Sciences is getting my money. The world suffers from a plague of HIV related illness and death. The virus brings down developing nations, preventing them from realizing any potential they could have as societies, and as members of the international community. Gilead's mission is to solve a global pandemic. They are doing the best possible job of creating new HIV medications to treat the symptoms while searching for the cure, simplifying the treatments which the afflicted need in order to live happy lives, and making sure that those medications and treatments reach the people who need them most. So if you want to make a difference with your money, Gilead is the choice.
This choice is not about a safe investment. It's not about how much money you have in the bank, and it's most definitely not about the classic American self interest which is supposed to drive our capitalist economy. It's about whether you want to keep bolstering the developed countries' already incredible health care systems, or if you want to bring the developing countries up to speed. You choose your own level of involvement.
-Spencer Swan
Information for this article was gathered from:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fcgo2IOwkM4
http://www.pfizer.com/files/research/pipeline/2011_0811/pipeline_2011_0811.pdf
http://www.slideshare.net/unitaid/gilead-sciences-utd-unaids-mpp-june9samuel-clifford
Innovation in the Pharmaceutical Industry — Future Prospects
When making investments Spencer the majority of Americans make them based off of self-interest. I would like to think that Americans would invest in such a promising company such as Gilead Sciences because Gilead is looking to make a major difference in the world, but the chances are slim unless they publicize this idea more. HIV is a serious disease that drug companies have yet to find a cure for so it will most likely take Gilead a lot of time and money to research and develop an effective cure. I am not saying that it is impossible nor unlikely for people to invest in this company because I do think it is very possible but it needs more publicity. We live in a time now that people embrace saving the world and going green, and I think that if this company and their ideas were brought more so into the light for the public to embrace, just as they do with cancer walks and funds raisers and things of that nature, the same could be said and done for Gilead Sciences.
ReplyDeleteI realize that the American economy is based off of self-interest, Zenas, but all of the companies that I listed are rated well by financial analysts as potential money generators. So, the question becomes, where should the average consumer put their hard money, and for me, that company is Gilead because it is making a difference. I definitely agree that Gilead needs some more publicity if it wants to make its message known to a wider audience, but why not start with a blog post?
ReplyDelete