IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/hecopl/v12y2017i04p453-470_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Healthcare innovation and patent law’s ‘pharmaceutical privilege’: is there a pharmaceutical privilege? And if so, should we remove it?

Author

Listed:
  • Dutfield, Graham

Abstract

This article reviews current trends in patent claims regarding personalised, stratified and precision medicine. These trends are not particularly well understood by policymakers, even less by the public, and are quite recent. Consequently, their implications for the public interest have hardly been thought out. Some see personalised and other secondary drug patent claims as promoting better targeted treatment. Others are inclined to see them as \manifestations of ‘evergreening’ whereby companies are, in some cases quite cynically, trying to extend market monopolies in old products or creating new monopolies based on supposedly improved versions of such earlier drugs. The article claims that the relaxation of ‘novelty’ is a privilege unavailable to inventions in other fields and that on balance the patent system does privilege this industry and that no adequate case has yet been made thus far to prove the public benefits overall.

Suggested Citation

  • Dutfield, Graham, 2017. "Healthcare innovation and patent law’s ‘pharmaceutical privilege’: is there a pharmaceutical privilege? And if so, should we remove it?," Health Economics, Policy and Law, Cambridge University Press, vol. 12(4), pages 453-470, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:hecopl:v:12:y:2017:i:04:p:453-470_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1744133117000111/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Livio Garattini & Bruno Finazzi, 2022. "Pharmaceutical Patents in Europe: Radical Reforms Rather Than Getting Rid?," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 20(4), pages 453-455, July.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:hecopl:v:12:y:2017:i:04:p:453-470_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/hep .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.