NationStates Jolt Archive

Suspend Patents on Healthcare

AWARE patents were first established to protect and safeguard scientific technology.

OBSERVING the Resolution #9 which guarantees all citizens the right of being medically treated, Resolution #42 which supports the increase of access to medicine, Resolution #77 which emphasizes the protocol to prevent epidemic diseases, Resolution #84 which supports the treatment against AIDS and Resolution #98 which recognizes the need to erradicate smallpox.

CONCERNED with the increasing number of citizens from poor nations yearning for epidemic and terminal treatment.

NOTING the incapacity of third world nations to relate with the costs and the impossibility to distribute the treatment to the population due to monetary barriers.

DECLARES the right of poor nations to produce specific medicine and to lead epidemic and terminal treatments, suspending the money to patent rights. The measure will result in a more popular policy of distribution and will reduce the costs of treatment, facilitating the purchase of the specific medicine and erradicating substancially the number of citizens infected while relieving the agony of those in terminal conditions.

Suspend Patents on Healthcare
CONCERNED with the increasing number of citizens from poor nations yearning for epidemic and terminal treatment.

NOTING the incapacity of third world nations to relate with the costs and the impossibility to distribute the treatment to the population due to monetary barriers.Define "Third World" in terms of NationStates. Which nations in this game are "Third World" and which are not?

... and Resolution #98 which recognizes the need to erradicate smallpox.Ahem. I wrote Resolution #98, and I can assure you that absolutely no patents need be violated to permit large-scale vaccination against variola to proceed apace.

The method of preventing the spread of variola via vaccination was invented in the late 18th Century, based on an older technique (inoculation) developed in medieval Turkey. Trust me on this one, there are no 200+ year old patents interfering with the ability of "Third World" nations to protect their people from smallpox. None.

Now, w/respect to other medical technologies, how do you propose to compensate inventors for their work? You state...AWARE patents were first established to protect and safeguard scientific technology.... and then just let the matter drop, as though there's no longer any need for such protection. So what are you going to do when people stop working on new cures and treatments because it's not worth their time?

Hint: why not propose that the United Nations buy out older patents, and then publish them to the world? That would eliminate both problems in one stroke: inventors would still be compensated, and technologies would be more rapidly disseminated.

Another problem is that you haven't drawn a line between things like anti-retrovirals for AIDS and Viagra. As you've written this, "poor nations" can get away with infringing patents on just about anything vaguely medical.

You could promote publically-funded international research into treatments for diseases mainly afflicting the poor, and make the results open to all (EDIT: as well as Allemande's suggestion of buying out patents). This would also deal with the problem that most medical corporations aren't particularly interested in doing this research, because drugs for less threatening problems in MEDCs are more profitable (e.g. in reality there's more money in Viagra than in treatments for African strains of HIV), and will be even less interested if their patents become meaningless.

So....Let me figure this out. My country now has to pay for a poorer nation to get vaccinations? My medical companies no longer get paid for the huge amount of research they do? THis will kill pharmaceutical companies anywhere in the universe.

Darkumbria, and indeed the region of Northwind, will not supporting this proposal. Medical companies of the universe do their business by selling various cures and preventative medicine. That's their business. What's next? Let's force food making companies of the universe to give their food away. After all, their have to be people going to bed hungry somewhere in the universe.

So....Let me figure this out. My country now has to pay for a poorer nation to get vaccinations? My medical companies no longer get paid for the huge amount of research they do? THis will kill pharmaceutical companies anywhere in the universe.

Darkumbria, and indeed the region of Northwind, will not supporting this proposal. Medical companies of the universe do their business by selling various cures and preventative medicine. That's their business. What's next? Let's force food making companies of the universe to give their food away. After all, their have to be people going to bed hungry somewhere in the universe.Why, yes! Didn't you get that memo?

Here is where my real-life liberalism gives way to hard headed reality - or rather, the "reality" of NationStates. There is no "Third World" in NationStates, no poor South left with the wreckage of imperialism to contend with, overpopulated, technology poor, etc. In Real Life™ there are nations that are in such shabby condition that it would take generations to turn them around, and on top of that it's not really their fault that they're that way to start with.

But in NationStates all countries start with a flag, a motto, a currency, a simple questionnaire, and 5 million people. What could be more egalitarian? You get your daily issues and you answer them, and you either wind up rich or a basket case.

In Real Life™ I might be sympathetic to the plight of poor countries, but in NationStates I'm not. I'm not because poor countries choose to be poor by answering the daily issues the wrong way. Or maybe I should say that they answer them in a way designed to optimise something else - social justice, morality, civil rights, political liberty, military power, whatever - that their Head of State deems more important than the money, and thus end up precisely where their Beloved Leader wants them to be. If that's not as rich as you like, well, as that old guy up there on the porch says, "ya takes yer pick and ya gits yer choice." You must have decided that whatever it was you wanted was worth more than the money. C'est la vie.

I'm generous with my own poor, because they didn't generally choose their poverty. But don't ask me to subsidize another player's foolishness. It doesn't take a genius to reach at least a "Strong" economic rating; unless you're really punishing business, you can get there without too much difficulty.

ooc: Allemande, you're overlooking one hugely important factor in the nature of some NS nations: some players choose to roleplay developing nations, because they find doing so more interesting. I'm sorry, but I'd say this completely invalidates your argument.

What's more, the '5 million' figure is completely open to interpretation. Many players view the figure as an indicator of age, or respect, or influence.

Take Ecopoeia, for instance. It is a developing nation combining elements of numerous real world nations (including Mauritius, Vanuatu, Scotland and Japan), with a population of some fourteen million. Not 3+ billion, fourteen million. Ecopoeia is poor for several good reasons, including a crippling colonial legacy, poor governance pre-'Ecopoetry' and arecent natural disaster.

With all this in mind, I think it's completely reasonable for the NSUN to address the issues of poverty, drug distribution and trade imbalances with respect to developing nations.

I suspect your view of the game is somewhat blinkered in certain areas (as was mine for the first few month I played - Ecopoeia started off as my utopia, until I realised just how boring perfection is).

ooc: Allemande, you're overlooking one hugely important factor in the nature of some NS nations: some players choose to roleplay developing nations, because they find doing so more interesting. I'm sorry, but I'd say this completely invalidates your argument.

What's more, the '5 million' figure is completely open to interpretation. Many players view the figure as an indicator of age, or respect, or influence.

Take Ecopoeia, for instance. It is a developing nation combining elements of numerous real world nations (including Mauritius, Vanuatu, Scotland and Japan), with a population of some fourteen million. Not 3+ billion, fourteen million. Ecopoeia is poor for several good reasons, including a crippling colonial legacy, poor governance pre-'Ecopoetry' and arecent natural disaster.

With all this in mind, I think it's completely reasonable for the NSUN to address the issues of poverty, drug distribution and trade imbalances with respect to developing nations.

I suspect your view of the game is somewhat blinkered in certain areas (as was mine for the first few month I played - Ecopoeia started off as my utopia, until I realised just how boring perfection is).Not all my puppets are industrial nations, and some are quite poor. Nonetheless, I'm not convinced that they're "entitled" to the wealth of the richer First World countries, given that making then poorer, more agrarian nations was my choice to begin with...

As for utopias, can you build one of those in this game? Really?!?

Still, I'll consider your argument. I'm just not sure to what extent the "poorer" nations in this game are really poor for structural reasons, rather than management style.

Not all my puppets are industrial nations, and some are quite poor. Nonetheless, I'm not convinced that they're "entitled" to the wealth of the richer First World countries, given that making then poorer, more agrarian nations was my choice to begin with...
OOC: Ah, the IC arguments against proposals such as this are fine, so long as you can justify them, of course. I just got the impression that you were using OOC arguments that failed to take into account players' visions of their nations.

As for 'entitled', I don't think most people - IC or OOC - are thinking in such terms.

To clarify, I don't mean to come across as condescending. I suspect my choice of language in the first post was, um, not the best.

EDIT ('cos we're both editing at the same time, it seems!): Utopian in my eyes, so the embodiment of hell for many players, I suspect.

To clarify, I don't mean to come across as condescending. I suspect my choice of language in the first post was, um, not the best.Not a problem, and you have a good point.

Since all nations start on more or less an even footing, I see NationStates as being set in a kind of post-post-colonial world, in which the former colonies have had time to catch up with the richer First World, while some of the latter have had time to slip into decay. Kind of like the late 21st Century (economically and demographically) with late 20th Century/early 21st Century technology and social issues...

Not a problem, and you have a good point.

Since all nations start on more or less an even footing, I see NationStates as being set in a kind of post-post-colonial world, in which the former colonies have had time to catch up with the richer First World, while some of the latter have had time to slip into decay. Kind of like the late 21st Century (economically and demographically) with late 20th Century/early 21st Century technology and social issues...
Which is fine on a regional basis (and a scenario that I wouldn't mind approaching, thought not with Ecopoeia), but unworkable on the larger scale.

Anyway, I think we're hijacking... oops.