Being in this rather liberal town since fall term, I have run across a lot of new people who speak out about politics and any issue that comes floating through their mind. The free exchange (or shouting) of ideas that one gets on a college campus is a new and fairly unusual thing. Within this melting pot of ideas, voices and opinions, I have heard a great deal of scorn for capitalism. It appears to be a bitter issue for some students who say the word with an eye roll and a sigh of contempt; similar behavior can also be observed in a few professors. Despite the speeches I have heard about the evils of capitalism, I have never had the slightest problem with it, until recently.
For the most part, capitalism is a good system that, in my opinion, works well. I consider capitalism to be rather logical: Those who have drive and ambition succeed through their own devices. Those who work hard have the chance to be very successful. People are responsible for their own well-being. While it is true that the system has its pitfalls, the benefits of a free market far outweigh them. Overall, it is system that values the individual, and I like that.
Fortunately, the country does not operate as cold-heartedly, each-man-for-himself as capitalism would make it sound. There are many people, of every income level, who do what they can to help those who are in need. If someone needs help, there is usually another citizen there to lend a helping hand. If one has difficulty succeeding in our individualist economy, there are often individuals and organizations willing to help. And even though the capitalism is very much a game of private businesses, the government works to set guidelines and laws to keep the economy fair and balanced. And though there are glitches, one can usually count on the innate goodness of man to fill the void left by government and political systems.
I have faith in this system: In the balance between the competition for money and help that we are able to receive when we need a boost. I am aware that individuals often get the raw end of the deal while corporations make out like bandits. As a consumer this doesn’t worry me too much because I have the power to chose which companies I support. This is something that I do every day and it is something we all have the power to do. Every company is working based on supply and demand. If I don’t like something about a company – such as its practice of testing on animals – I have the ability to switch to a better company and thereby hurt that business, albeit in a small way.
But when a company has total control of a certain product, it often becomes power hungry, not to mention greedy. This is now true for Genentech, the maker of a drug, Avastin, widely used to treat colon cancer. Avastin is touted by many doctors as being a “superb drug” that is being used for the treatment of breast and lung cancer as well as the intended colon cancer. The drug has been shown to even prolong the lives of late-stage breast and lung cancer patient by several months. So, why is the drug primarily given only to colon cancer patients? The price tag.
As a breast and lung cancer treatment, Avastin will cost $100,000 a year. This is double the cost of the drug when used as a colon cancer treatment. The price will go up because a higher dosage is needed and the company refuses to produce a higher dose, which would not require much money. Expensive medicine is certainly not a new concept, but Genentech is giving things a new spin.
Drug companies typically justify high prices by citing the cost of developing new medicine. Genentech, however, comes right out to say that the cost of Avastin is so high because it is selling a life-sustaining therapy, and if society wants the benefits it must be ready to pay for them. This is a rather bold and arrogant move on the part of
Genentech. Unfortunately, Genetech may be able to get away with this because of the quality of its product and the lack of a sufficient alternative from another company.
While doctors and patients may look for alternative drugs, there is a fear that the pricing tactics of Genentech may encourage other companies to raise the cost of their own oncology drugs, making it near to impossible for some to afford cancer treatment.
While I admire pharmaceutical companies and their employees for creating life-saving drugs, I am saddened by their pricing practices. These companies certainly have the right to price their drugs as they wish; that is an unfortunate byproduct of our capitalist economy. It is not, however, fair to price necessary medicine so that only the wealthy can afford treatment. At this point, one can only hope that another company can create a product equal to Avastin, price it fairly and supply the much-needed demand.

[email protected]