Merck River Blindness Essay
River Blindness MERCK AND RIVER BLINDNESS Does Dr. Roy Vagelos or Merck and Co. have a responsibility to pursue R&D for a human
version of Ivermectin, the drug for river blindness? Lets take this question to a positive
evaluation. Developing a drug to combat river blindness has potential costs and benefits.
Merck discovered an opportunity to treat millions of infected people around the world but
knew that the drug would probably never see commercial use. Investing millions of dollars in
research plus knowing that the company would not be able to profit from the results did
amplified the risk of Merck coming up empty handed. Merck has a long history of being pioneers in the development of major antibiotic compounds, beginning with penicillin and streptomycin in the the1940s (Donaldson page 254). While scientists were encouraging the
firm to invest in further research to determine …show more content…
Of course these scientists would know that they are working for a for-profit company. But, they are also highly trained scientists with advanced degrees, who probably have humanistic values about helping people and curing disease. So, this is an important consideration. Merck and Co. were obligated to study and produce the human version of the vaccine. The main parties involved in this ethical dilemma are Roy Vagelos and millions of poor people infected with parasite or being at risk to be infected. Roy Vagelos has a corporate economic concern to raise the profitability of the company by means of new products. The head of the Merck and Co. also had an ethical concern to help poor people to survive, as the philosophy of the company is to investigate drugs for people not just for money. Millions of infected, or at risk to be infected, people have a concern to have access to a drugs, which would kill the parasite without side
version of Ivermectin, the drug for river blindness? Lets take this question to a positive
evaluation. Developing a drug to combat river blindness has potential costs and benefits.
Merck discovered an opportunity to treat millions of infected people around the world but
knew that the drug would probably never see commercial use. Investing millions of dollars in
research plus knowing that the company would not be able to profit from the results did
amplified the risk of Merck coming up empty handed. Merck has a long history of being pioneers in the development of major antibiotic compounds, beginning with penicillin and streptomycin in the the1940s (Donaldson page 254). While scientists were encouraging the
firm to invest in further research to determine …show more content…
Of course these scientists would know that they are working for a for-profit company. But, they are also highly trained scientists with advanced degrees, who probably have humanistic values about helping people and curing disease. So, this is an important consideration. Merck and Co. were obligated to study and produce the human version of the vaccine. The main parties involved in this ethical dilemma are Roy Vagelos and millions of poor people infected with parasite or being at risk to be infected. Roy Vagelos has a corporate economic concern to raise the profitability of the company by means of new products. The head of the Merck and Co. also had an ethical concern to help poor people to survive, as the philosophy of the company is to investigate drugs for people not just for money. Millions of infected, or at risk to be infected, people have a concern to have access to a drugs, which would kill the parasite without side