My response to the Roche debate

[neuralbuddha]

germanbishounen has been hosting a debate on whether the accusations made in a New scientist article were justified. The debate has become quite heated. Due to what I assume is an oversight I am not currently able to post my latest response to the thread. I am therefore posting it here.

Comments

[spudtater]

Communists were one of the groups of people that Hitler persecuted, which kinda suggests he wasn't socialist! 100,000 communists died in the Holocaust.

Going back to the original debate (I am unable to comment on that page since it is friends-locked), the claim I find least believeable is that if it weren't for Roche's work, the drug would not even exist. Scientists will tell you that parallel invention is incredibly common in science; if Roche didn't invent this drug, some other lab would have, probably within just a couple of years.

My own views are that property rights are important, but the right to life is far more so. If it is a choice between one person getting rich from their work, or one person surviving an otherwise deadly disease, I know whose side I'd come down on.

[neuralbuddha]

germanbishounen has apparently turned off commenting as he has work to get on with which is kind of fair enough, I guess.