What is the value of a life?
It is common practice to live a life reliant on medicine. This poses possible economic issues. If the drug required for survival is under a monopoly, the price can skyrocket. For example, “Turing Pharmaceuticals CEO Martin Shkreli raised the price of the malaria and toxoplasmosis drug Daraprim from $13.50 to $750 per pill” (Spoer). Selfish acts such as this are seen as an outrage by many, a death sentence by some, and as a conduit to spark debate by others. In the midst of public outrage, there has been conversation on a separate broader topic, the idea of government funded pharmaceutical companies.
Most view the idea of having government funded pharmaceutical companies as more of a safeguard or safety net for those who cannot afford normal medication. This is not a master plan of getting the government out of debt; it is a shield to defend the health of everyone in need of medicine for survival. It would protect Americans by removing any chance of a greedy pharmaceutical company “evaluating human suffering in terms of its dollar value” (Spoer). While as a country, we have the highest percentage of citizens with some form of health care, but this leaves 10% of the nation at risk of the possibly tyrannical empire that is company run pharmaceuticals. Not only that, but one in four individuals under the poverty line, those in most need of this assistance, do not have access to health care.
…show more content…
Not having multiple organizations working towards the same goal leaves us at risk for “prioritizing the health of people who can afford healthcare over the health of people who cannot” (Spoer). To Risk a drug being under the control of a single pharmaceutical company is to risk the health of all those in need of said