Pharma industry pushes back on Biden’s ‘dangerous’ plan
The Biden administration’s proposals target price gouging triggers resistance | The move, which includes the consideration of march-in rights for taxpayer-funded drugs, may ‘jeopardise collaborative partnerships and hinder innovation.
The pharmaceutical industry is fighting back against Biden’s proposal to exercise march-in rights for taxpayer-funded drugs and other inventions.
On December 7, the Biden administration announced plans aimed at curbing the price gouging of certain drugs, a move that has been widely criticised by pharma companies.
Megan Van Etten, the deputy vice president of Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA) described the ideas as “another loss” for US patients who depend on cooperation between the public and private sectors to develop new treatments and cures.
Biotechnology Innovation Organisation's (BIO) chief advocacy officer, Nick Shipley, said the move would hinder the collaborative partnerships between the private and public sectors that the Bayh-Dole Act aimed to promote.
He also felt it was “disappointing” that the White House chose to include this in its broader statement “when there are so many other overdue promising policy recommendations where we could find common ground to work together to bring down health care costs”.
Van Etten cautioned that the misuse of march-in rights could “chill innovation and undermine collaboration” between the public and private sectors.
This, she argued, “is not the right solution for increasing competition or improving patient affordability”.
“The administration is sending us back to a time when government research sat on a shelf, not benefitting anyone,” added Van Etten.
Shipley said: “Using the Bayh-Dole Act’s march-in process as a mechanism to control prices is a dangerous precedent to set.”
The move would create “uncertainty” within the biotech industry during a time when policy makers have been adding more “obstacles to innovation”, according to Shipley.
Opponents to Biden’s plan believe that smaller biotech firms—key contributors to medical innovation—would face challenges in raising funds and sustaining a reliable investment foundation from strong private sector support. Such funding, they argue, is crucial for bringing about new advancements in biomedicine.
“Any policy that encourages the government to seize private company patents is a policy that discourages investing in companies that have accepted government funding,” said Shipley.
Did you enjoy reading this story? Sign up to our free daily newsletters and get stories sent like this straight to your inbox.
