Saturday, January 07, 2006
SOME PROBLEMS FOR GRADUATE STUDENTS
I read an article in the paper a few days ago about medical research, particularly research leading to new drugs. Before 1980, according to the writer, most of the research on new drugs was done in government and university laboratories. The developed and tested drugs were then licensed to private firms for manufacture and sale. Today most of the research on new drugs is done in private firms who have their own research laboratories. Unlike the university and government laboratories, researchers in these institutions do not necessarily publish all their results. As a consequence, some drugs are marketed without the information that they may not be safe in all circumstances. Recently some well-publicized drugs to relieve the pain of arthritis have been recalled because of information finally made public that the firms that manufactured them had kept secret.
Even more important than the withholding of information is the reason for choosing what drugs to develop and market. Publicly funded university and government laboratories choose drugs that will be of greatest benefit to the population. Privately funded laboratories choose drugs that will bring the greatest profit to the parent firm. The writer of the article stated that this urge toward greatest profit rather than greatest benefit to the whole population tends to increase the cost of drugs.
This assertion leads me to suggest a topic for a graduate student’s thesis:
Comparison of the overall benefits of drugs developed in government and university laboratories funded by public money with the benefits of drugs developed in laboratories funded by private money.
The study should include a comparison of the overall cost to the public of prescription drugs under the two regimes of research and development. In other words, how much does our present system of private funding of drug research contribute to the rising cost of medical care in the United States?
On a different topic, another assertion by persons in positions of power and influence bothers me. President Bush and Vice President Cheney and other members of the Bush administration claim that the tax cuts of 2001 and 2002 have stimulated the economy and should be made permanent. I would like to see some graduate students studying our economic history for the past hundred years to find out whether rates of taxation have had any effect at all on the economy.
The topic of the thesis might be:
Effects of tax rates on business activity in the United States.
My own belief is that the economy depends on the world-wide business cycle and that the modest changes made in tax rates in the United States do not have an important effect, if any at all, on the economy. For example, tax rates were higher during the Clinton Administration but the economy was doing very nicely.
Interested graduate students are welcome to claim these topics as their own.
Even more important than the withholding of information is the reason for choosing what drugs to develop and market. Publicly funded university and government laboratories choose drugs that will be of greatest benefit to the population. Privately funded laboratories choose drugs that will bring the greatest profit to the parent firm. The writer of the article stated that this urge toward greatest profit rather than greatest benefit to the whole population tends to increase the cost of drugs.
This assertion leads me to suggest a topic for a graduate student’s thesis:
Comparison of the overall benefits of drugs developed in government and university laboratories funded by public money with the benefits of drugs developed in laboratories funded by private money.
The study should include a comparison of the overall cost to the public of prescription drugs under the two regimes of research and development. In other words, how much does our present system of private funding of drug research contribute to the rising cost of medical care in the United States?
On a different topic, another assertion by persons in positions of power and influence bothers me. President Bush and Vice President Cheney and other members of the Bush administration claim that the tax cuts of 2001 and 2002 have stimulated the economy and should be made permanent. I would like to see some graduate students studying our economic history for the past hundred years to find out whether rates of taxation have had any effect at all on the economy.
The topic of the thesis might be:
Effects of tax rates on business activity in the United States.
My own belief is that the economy depends on the world-wide business cycle and that the modest changes made in tax rates in the United States do not have an important effect, if any at all, on the economy. For example, tax rates were higher during the Clinton Administration but the economy was doing very nicely.
Interested graduate students are welcome to claim these topics as their own.
