Dave wrote:
On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 11:15:55 -0400, Martin Baxter said:


I believe that is correct Dave. BTW what do you think of the idea of patenting a drug for treating a specific disease and then later on finding
another disease to treat with the same drug, and as result being able to extend the original patent?


I don't have any problem with that in principle. The policy question is
whether the financial incentive is necessary or appropriate to encourage
inventors to develop the use of old drugs for new applications.

Dave

In principal it appears sound, however it hasn't really worked that way. Instead it has led to the creation of fictional syndromes. In the psychiatric
field, make up a new disease (irrational fear of menstrual cramps is one), give it a nice latin name, get a couple of crackpot shrinks to include it
in the index and Bob's your uncle! Presto, another few years to gouge the public.

I would have much less of a problem with pharmaceutical companies if they didn't spend more, much more, on advertising than they do on R&D.

Cheers
Marty