Some people believe that anything that positively affects their wellbeing, especially when you throw the words HEALTH or MEDICAL in the mix, is an entitlement. It’s a “need” therefore the creator or owner of the EpiPen somehow morally owes it to other people to make their creation affordable or accessible to others.
When do you say to the creator of something — even though this thing didn’t exist before you came along and created it, now people see it as an entitlement therefore you lose your right to your property? You have to provide it at some arbitrary number that makes it “affordable” for the masses?
Well, that’s what the patent time limit is for. Genius creator or research team may have made something but after ten years anyone else can copy it or derive it. Perhaps ten years is too long, because by ten years people already feel entitled to the latest health innovation.
Time limit patents to two years on medical devices, perhaps.
Another course: we make the FDA optional. Wasn’t the EpiPen created in the 80s? If so there’s no patent on that anymore. If FDA approval was optional, you can sell any medical device you want, it’s up to the consumer if they want to risk a non-FDA approved device. The sheer amount of money it takes to get a medical device FDA approved is the primary barrier to entry for affordable generics. Yes, I agree that Mylan is out to get as much money as possible. Yes, often corporations seem to be out to make money, not to better the world. But if we made FDA approval optional and/or made it affordable for generic creators to get FDA approved, there wouldn’t be the opportunity to gouge consumers for medical devices.