iSixSigma

Pharmaceutical Patent Losses

Six Sigma – iSixSigma Forums Old Forums General Pharmaceutical Patent Losses

This topic contains 8 replies, has 4 voices, and was last updated by  lin 10 years, 2 months ago.

Viewing 9 posts - 1 through 9 (of 9 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #52544

    Anonymous

    I’m seeking support to change the term of pharmaceutical patents and a change to the examination process.
    Currently the term of a patent is twenty years from the Filing Date (Date of disclosure of an invention under the first to file rule.)  It can then take up to seven years to perform human trials to determine efficacy and safety, which implies a commercial life of only thirteen years.
    By changing the patent examination process to include a review of human trials and by changing the term from the Filing Date to the Issue Date, we can motivate pharmaceutical companies and reduce the cost of development of complex drugs.
    In the UK, we can’t trust Insurance companies because they always seem to find a nebulous prior condition, which is why everyone ‘loves’ the NHS. In the USA, insurance appears to work very well – perhaps owing to the fact Reprentatives don’t sit on the Boards of Insurance Companies.
    Please consider supporting this effort by petitioning your Reprentatives; reequesting a review of current patent law, particularly with respect to the term of pharmaceutical patents.
    Thank you for your patience ..
    (I have no affiliation with any pharmaceutical company of perveyor of medicines.)

    0
    #184902

    Robert Butler
    Participant

      You said “It can then take up to seven years to perform human trials to determine efficacy and safety, which implies a commercial life of only thirteen years.”  ….no it doesn’t.  Seven years is the extreme – what is typical?  What is the spread around typical? Is typical a median or a mean? What is the actual cost of typical? What is the spread of the cost around typical? How do companies currently recoup this cost? How would they recoup the cost if we gave them preferential treatment? How would they return this favor? etc.
      In the absence of any real analysis of time to market after disclosure and issues related to cost and cost recovery this request for support sounds like nothing more than an attempt to misuse numbers to gain support for preferential extension of patent terms for certain business segments.

    0
    #184904

    Anonymous

    You can easily research the numbers yourself ..
    By the way, your country will be bankrupt by the end of the year! Now go and research that …
     

    0
    #184907

    Robert Butler
    Participant

      The point of my initial post was not to start a fight  – it was to ask for the sort of information I would expect a SixSigma practitioner to provide in defense of whatever position they were trying to present. 
      When I’m presented with a claim to the effect that such-and-such is a problem and that I should consider granting someone very special dispensation because of this supposed problem I don’t think it is unreasonable to ask for reasoned proof and appropriate statistics..
      As for my looking it up – No.  The burden of proof rests on the shoulders of those making the claim…a meaningful summary would answer the questions asked in the first missive as well as provide contrasts – for example what is the typical lead time from disclosure to product for other industries ( a breakout by type would be very helpful) and are the differences significant ?  I know from personal experience that a long lead time between disclosure and product to market is not unique to drug manufacture.

    0
    #184908

    Anonymous

    Understood ..
    However, what kind of conversation takes your approach … imagine someone in conversation. Wow, the traffic in Austin is the pits!
    What do you mean by pits? Define the term : what are is the median and the fourth-spread of traffic on teh I-35.
    No wonder people can’t have simple converations and exchange views anymore. Is it any wonder our ‘internal’ enemies can run false flag so easily and rob us blind –  like the two trillion dollars an American hero –  Mr. Grayson is trying to find.
    Please ignore my request for you to support your own interests.
     

    0
    #184910

    TREW
    Member

    “By changing the patent examination process to include a review of human trials and by changing the term from the Filing Date to the Issue Date, we can motivate pharmaceutical companies and reduce the cost of development of complex drugs”
    I disagree, this rule is helping the drug companies reduce cycle time and improve processes. Because of this rule it is in their interest to reduce this time to a minimum by improving their process without it you would remove a great incentive to improve the time it takes to get the drug to market and so save lives/ help people.
    On costs I would say you’d probaly increase development costs due to the delays this would add to the process.
    It would also not reduce the costs of the drugs as they would just take more profits over 20 years rather than 13 and it would add another 7 years until we can get the cheaper none branded drugs.
    And lets not get into the NHS, insurance debate, other than it’s nice to know which country has the longer life expectancy and lower child mortality rates. Even if we do have bad teeth.
     

    0
    #184913

    Jim Court
    Participant
    #184931

    Anonymous

    Thanks for the link .. I did contact a patent attorney friend of mine in Austin to ask about this and he told me he wasn’t aware of any extensions, but he admitted pharmaceuticals were outside the scope of his expertise.

    0
    #184951

    lin
    Participant

    Andy: Sometime back you pointed out that most things were topsy-turvy – you are right. Thanks for trying to wake us up. Regretably, the sleeping giant is still asleep.Bill

    0
Viewing 9 posts - 1 through 9 (of 9 total)

The forum ‘General’ is closed to new topics and replies.