|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
posted March 14, 2021 06:39 PM |
|
Edited by Corribus at 20:23, 14 Mar 2021.
|
MOD EDIT:
Artu, I apologize, I edited your post instead of replying to it. However I much of it is preserved in my reply below.
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost
|
|
Lith-Maethor
Honorable
Legendary Hero
paid in Coin and Cleavage
|
posted March 14, 2021 06:42 PM |
|
|
Heh...
blizzardboy said:
Oh Lith. Sweetheart.
I'm sorry but you're not my type.
blizzardboy said:
Where is your green text?
You clearly don't understand how HC's code works.
blizzardboy said:
Tell you what. Let's swap roles. I'll behave like a 13-year-old and you act normal. 
Well, it would be an improvement for both of us, I reckon...
blizzardboy said:
Thank you for proving my point btw. There hasn't been a pandemic on this scale since 1918. S. Africa was an appropriate country to lead this issue considering they are currently dealing with a more infectious variant in their borders.
I was not trying to make any point beyond "it's not the only pandemic this century."
____________
You are suffering from delusions of adequacy.
|
|
Kipshasz
Undefeatable Hero
Elvin's Darkside
|
|
posted March 14, 2021 08:16 PM |
|
|
It's the most retardedly handled pandemic of the century to be precise.
____________
"Kip is the Gavin McInnes of HC" - Salamandre
"Ashan to the Trashcan", "I got PTSD from H7. " - LizardWarrior
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted March 14, 2021 08:22 PM |
|
Edited by Corribus at 20:23, 14 Mar 2021.
|
Artu said:
Governments gave those companies a lot of money for a vaccine and governments execute laws at the moment, that are unconstitutional under normal circumstances. So it’s ok when they do it when it comes to us taking a weekend stroll and not okay when it comes to big pharma?
I don't understand, maybe it's just your English, how does a government execute laws at the moment, that are unconstitutional under "normal circumstances". Either a law is constitutional or it isn't. And if you don't think a law is constitutional, that's why we have a court system.
Quote:
The vote also reminds me of the great Jones Salk who had found the vaccine for polio and who didnt patent it to maximize world wide distribution and who famously said “can you patent the sun?” What happened to him, did he strave out of poverty? It was the 1950’s, there was already big pharma and I’m guessing they made some money in the process. Just like I’m guessing these companies wont go bankrupt if they cease to “maximize profit” for once during a pandemic.
Irrelevant whether they will go bankrupt or not. There's a difference between moral obligation (if such a thing exists) and legal imperative. You can't compel altruism.... can you? Sure, we can criticize companies on moral or ethical grounds as a fun philosophical exercise, but that's a different argument than whether companies are legally allowed to enforce their patents. It may be distasteful, but as far as I understand, it's within their rights. The law doesn't just get suspended because there's a pandemic. Sure, if you feel that patent rights should be suspended in these circumstances, urge your government to pass laws to that extent for the next time. Or, you can try to organize a big enough PR campaign to compel companies to not enforce their patents voluntarily, due to threat of loss of business. Good luck with that. The tough thing about pharmaceuticals is that people usually don't choose their drug manufacturer. Pharma companies are basically insulated from that kind of pressure.
____________
I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're goin', and hook up with them later. -Mitch Hedberg
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted March 14, 2021 08:41 PM |
|
|
I meant laws regarding a state of emergency can “freeze” your constitutional rights for a period of time, for instance a quarantine is simply suspending your right to travel. As I already said in the deleted part of my post, the precautions and countermeasures for this pandemic (and there are some scientists who oppose them, different topic though) are anything but regular, so it is not irregular to expect irregular laws when it comes to patent laws either.
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted March 14, 2021 09:07 PM |
|
|
There are other forms of intellectual property protection beyond patents, such as trade secrets. Do you kick down the doors of businesses to compel them to share those, as well? Maybe torture scientists to force them to talk? Maybe extreme extrapolation, yes. But stranger things have happened when constitutional rights are suspended in the name of "the greater good". That's a phrase that can be bent to an autocrat's will pretty easily.
____________
I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're goin', and hook up with them later. -Mitch Hedberg
|
|
JoonasTo
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
What if Elvin was female?
|
|
posted March 14, 2021 09:17 PM |
|
Edited by JoonasTo at 21:18, 14 Mar 2021.
|
There is actually an international agreement for countries to forcefully license an invention in times of emergency. They are just not allowed to export it. This applies to medicine.
____________
DON'T BE A NOOB, JOIN A.D.V.E.N.T.U.R.E.
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted March 14, 2021 09:22 PM |
|
Edited by artu at 21:23, 14 Mar 2021.
|
Had the WTO vote passed, was this going to be about torturing scientists or establishing a totalitarian regime? It’s a short-sighted decision, majority of the voter countries supported enabling poor countries to produce their own vaccine and that was the right and the practical thing to do. Laws are not set in stone, they have the potential to adapt to an irregular situation and this certainly counts as one in my book.
And to repeat what I emphasize, aren’t all these countermeasures already “suspending our constitutional rights” at the moment? One can use the same extrapolation to say, “well, today they took our right to travel, what’s next, torturing us if we go out?” It will hardly come to that.
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost
|
|
blizzardboy
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Nerf Herder
|
|
posted March 14, 2021 11:06 PM |
|
|
The claims about breaking down doors and torturing people are definitely far-fetched. We've already had various "rights" (they're not actually rights, regardless if some people think they are) suspended in various ways from the pandemic. It's not a slippery slope where you suspend patent rights one day and the next day people are torturing researchers.
And it doesn't scale. Not even close. For almost all diseases, you have a small percentage of people affected by something and then a new patent comes out to treat it and it can be distributed to that small population relatively quickly. Because COVID is an extremely contagious airborne sickness it is forcing governments to do full or major shutdowns, which is causing global recession. That doesn't scale. Worst case scenario, if there is another pandemic like this in our generation and if companies are hesitant to invest because of patent rights being suspended in an emergency, you can reach into deep government pockets, but that seems unlikely to happen.
On the subject of patents, funding is already screwed up and antiquated as it is. The laws aren't caught up with contemporary science which is something an increasingly large number of researcehrs complain about. Do you want to know how many countries define aging as a disease? Zero. They only define symptoms of aging as diseases, like Alzheimers or cancer or heart disease. It deals a huge blow to the ability for research labs to actually save lives and extend lifespans and healthspans because they receive funding to deal with X, Y, or Z problem, which is almost always an extremely specific problem. I take metformin - among other things - to increase my lifespan but normally you would need a prescription for it because allegedly it's only good for diabetics (hint: no it's not). You can of course get a doctor to write out a prescription for it for life extension purposes and specialized health clinics are doing this more frequently.
____________
"Folks, I don't trust children. They're here to replace us."
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted March 14, 2021 11:20 PM |
|
|
It's also not just a simple issue of forcing companies to relinquish their patents. There's a regulatory aspect of it as well - it's not like any old joe can just manufacture a vaccine and distribute it, patent issues aside.
Quote:
Do you want to know how many countries define aging as a disease? Zero.
Is it? And anyway, What do you mean, "countries define...disease"?
This is word salad.
____________
I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're goin', and hook up with them later. -Mitch Hedberg
|
|
blizzardboy
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Nerf Herder
|
|
posted March 14, 2021 11:22 PM |
|
|
It's extremely relevant because of funding. Aging is not considered a disease.
____________
"Folks, I don't trust children. They're here to replace us."
|
|
Stevie
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted March 14, 2021 11:28 PM |
|
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted March 14, 2021 11:35 PM |
|
Edited by Corribus at 00:05, 15 Mar 2021.
|
artu said:
Laws are not set in stone, they have the potential to adapt to an irregular situation
If they are written that way. If they aren't, they aren't. Governments can write new laws, of course. But they can't just ignore parts they don't like (at least, not without authority granted to do so by other laws) because a special situation would make it convenient to do so.
Quote:
And to repeat what I emphasize, aren’t all these countermeasures already “suspending our constitutional rights” at the moment? One can use the same extrapolation to say, “well, today they took our right to travel, what’s next, torturing us if we go out?” It will hardly come to that.
Travel and its relationship to quarantine is an interesting question. In theory, the federal government is not permitted to pass laws that prevent free travel between states. This right is established in the 14th amendment. On the other hand, the government claims the right through statute to certain powers, some of which would seem to violate constitutional rights. By principle, the Constitution supersedes statute in the US, but of course it is never that simple. Ultimately the point is that if a citizen believes his or her Constitutional rights have been violated by an act of the Government, it may be settled in the courts. And many such cases have been settled during the pandemic. You may find this interesting.
But maybe you believe that the right to challenge government actions should also be suspended in a public health emergency?
Do I believe that the government should be able to suspend laws and rights for the public good during an emergency? Yeah, in some circumstances. Should the government be able to set aside any law it wants during an emergency for any length of time it wants? No, I don't. The question isn't whether there should be a line, but rather where it should be drawn.
____________
I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're goin', and hook up with them later. -Mitch Hedberg
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted March 14, 2021 11:41 PM |
|
Edited by Corribus at 23:43, 14 Mar 2021.
|
blizzardboy said:
It's extremely relevant because of funding. Aging is not considered a disease.
You haven't convinced me it is. What's a disease?
For another thing, "funding" isn't as simple as you are making it out to be. Are you talking about academic research or private industry? Even academic research funding is complicated; it comes from public and private sources and while Congress does establish limits and special objectives on a yearly basis - often to our detriment (e.g., gun violence) - I'm not sure where you get this idea that if something is not defined as a disease, it gets no public funding. The NIH has an entire institute dedicated to researching aging, and that includes a sizable budget for funding academic research. There are also nonprofit research organizations doing aging research that are funded by both public and private funding sources.
____________
I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're goin', and hook up with them later. -Mitch Hedberg
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted March 15, 2021 12:25 AM |
|
Edited by artu at 01:11, 15 Mar 2021.
|
Corribus said:
But maybe you believe that the right to challenge government actions should also be suspended in a public health emergency?
Do I believe that the government should be able to suspend laws and rights for the public good during an emergency? Yeah, in some circumstances. Should the government be able to set aside any law it wants during an emergency for any length of time it wants? No, I don't. The question isn't whether there should be a line, but rather where it should be drawn.
No, I think the right to challenge government actions is the skeleton key in any democratic regime and it should never be suspended. I’m talking about doing it through proper channels, of course and assuming they function. Although, emergency or public health emergency is a pretty broad term, if it’s something extremely urgent and catastrophic, like say, if they have to evecuate a city in 3 days or lock it down because people are dying in millions by the hour and you somehow still want to object, you wont have the time to do it anway, and in the worst kind of public health emergency things will probably turn pretty chaotic.
I can agree to the second part, but then again, had the richer countries not vetoed the proposal, would you have defined it as “setting aside any law they want for any length of time they want?” Do you think not accepting such a proposal is about protecting the backbone of constitutional rights? Or is it more about protecting and preserving an industry, and when I say preserve, I dont mean they would have completely collapsed if the proposal had passed, they would have just made less profit. So, I’d say this is a government(s) action that people can challenge. I’m not optimistic about how things would play out though, but I’m critical towards it nevertheless.
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted March 15, 2021 12:29 AM |
|
|
Stevie said:
What's stopping these countries from trading for vaccine rights instead of begging for a waive?
I guess, they dont have enough to offer and keeping the vaccine formulas is more profitable.
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted March 15, 2021 01:12 AM |
|
|
Well, we’re not exactly talking about nationalizing the pharma companies either.
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted March 15, 2021 02:26 AM |
|
|
Meh, I dont think so. The existence of private companies itself isnt the issue here, them having too much pressure and gravitas over governments is. Finance has more power over repsentitives of people, than people themselves.
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted March 15, 2021 03:34 AM |
|
|
To be clear, artu, I'm not advocating one position or the other. I'm saying it's not as simple as, Pharmaceutical companies are greedy snows and they should agree to give away their patents for the greater good, and if they don't, the government should force them to. If governments can just summarily render patents invalid because of some external condition, then patents no longer have value. That would throw the entire industry into turmoil. The fact of the matter is that that profits drive pharmaceutical research, and patents protect profits. Drugs are incredibly expensive to develop and market. Without patents and other forms of market exclusivity, companies would have no incentive to drive the creation of new pharmaceuticals and medical interventions. Catch 22. It's by no means a great system, and for a lot of reasons more nuanced than the one you bring up here, but it's also hard to conceive of a good alternative.
____________
I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're goin', and hook up with them later. -Mitch Hedberg
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted March 15, 2021 04:48 AM |
|
Edited by artu at 04:49, 15 Mar 2021.
|
Well, of course it’s much more nuanced than how I sum up or simplify to make a point here. And to clarify, I dont think each CEO who works for pharma industry is an evil person (what is that anyway, sociopaths?) who’s only incentive is to make more money. But the system pushes you to act in a certain direction. There’s nothing wrong with wanting to make a living, quality living by your work or research but when the scale is global, things kind of become too abstract and virtual for each individual. Somebody who may jump in front of a moving car to save a kid maybe, can also be responsible for signing contracts that result in many people dying. Just because “it’s not that simple” doesnt mean it cant be better. As of now, there is no better, functioning alternative to capitalism but that doesnt mean it cant be regulated or “nerfed” under special circumstances. Another example to this is issues concerning global warming for instance, if you leave it at the mercy of capitalist logic alone, we are ruined and so far, there have been a lot of decision making to back that up. So I think, being more critical and less excusing makes sense. I’m not suggesting to put their head on a spike after all.
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost
|
| |
|
|
This thread is pages long: 
