If you are one of those unfortunate souls infected with hepatitis-C, there is a cure: a form of interferon produced by Hoffman-La Roche and Schering Plough the surface of whose molecule is covered with a polyethylene glycol (PEG) molecule that causes the drug to persist in the body. The only hitch is that, in the profit-maximizing spirit of capitalism, the manufacturers have set the price of the drug at approximately #13,500.00/year, more than $1,000 per month. Most of the victims of hepatitis-C live in the poorest nations of the world, and $1,000 amounts to more than their entire annual income. Since Hoffman-La Roche and Schering Plough hold patents on the medication, manufacturing it inexpensively is all but out of the question for the poorer countries, so the victims must simply do without treatment and die from the virus.

Charging what the traffic will bear is a long-honored principle of capitalism. There is no doubt that Hoffman-La Roche and Schering Plough have set their price and output at the point of maximum profit, balancing supply and demand by the monopoly power given to them by the intellectual property laws. That millions may suffer and die from being unable to afford the drug may be an unfortunate result of corporate profit decisions, but corporations owe no duty towards anyone but their stockholders and that duty is to maximize the value of their investment. The fact that people need the medicine is only important to the corporation when that need becomes demand, that is, the willingness to purchase the product coupled with the ability to pay for it. The market itself, as described by economists, is perfectly happy to let millions perish as long as it "clears," I.e., supply and demand are balanced by the free wheeling and dealing of buyers and sellers.

Clearly, this is an amoral, if not evil, system, even though the managers and executives (and even stockholders) of Hoffman-La Roche and Schering Plough may be persons of the highest integrity, generosity and compassion. They cannot escape the corporate imperative of profit-maximizing, whose outcome is both impeccably logical but at the same time insane. The health of millions is sacrificed so that the makers of health-giving medicines can make as much money as possible from their monopolies.

Occasionally there is good news. British researchers have discovered a PEG-interferon as effective as the current product but which does not infringe on Hoffman-La Roche and Schering Plough's patents and which will be made available to patients at very low cost. Instead of placing the PEG molecule on the outside of the interferon protein, the researches have discovered how to place it inside the molecule. The British publication New Scientist has the details.

So the good guys will probably win this round and millions will have access to treatment they would otherwise not be able to afford. But this single happy ending does not solve the ethical, moral and political problems presented by an industry that exists ostensibly to save lives and at the same time exists to maximize its profits, interests that are almost diametrically opposed. The fabulous profits the pharmaceutical corporations have raked in over the past twenty or thirty years have enabled them to purchase disproportionate influence over legislators and regulators to the detriment of the public. This is a problem that will have to be faced before long.