Psyche, Science, and Society

The free market may kill us: Avian flu and the government response

David S. Bernstein in the Boston Phoenix has an excellent article — Yes, you should be afraid: As avian flu threatens to kill millions, Bush bets our lives on the free market — that discusses the dangers posed by Bush’s (and most Democrats’) free market approach to coping with a potential pandemic. Bernstein makes clear the dangers in relying on iincentives to get private companies to produce needed vaccines. For one thing, the incentive may very well fail. And they may discourage the production of the most effective vaccine (by rewarding companies whether or not their product actually works).

The primary bird-flu strategy involves giving as many concessions as necessary to prompt the pharmaceutical industry to make the drugs we’ll need. There are arguments to be made for that approach, but stronger arguments against it — including, most noticeably, that it has failed miserably before….

To be ready to respond to an outbreak, we need to have, at the ready, an entire infrastructure in place for the creation, manufacture, and distribution of a drug that, until the time comes, does not and cannot exist.

Building and maintaining capacity for a theoretical future product is not something free markets do well. Companies do not invest millions in manufacturing facilities for non-existent products.

The pharmaceutical industry, meanwhile, has become the single largest government-influence peddler, according to the Center for Public Integrity, spending well over $100 million a year on lobbying and campaign contributions…. In short, judging by recent legislation and activity by agencies like the Food and Drug Administration, the US government is more likely to do big pharma’s bidding than vice versa.

The article is weak, however, in proposing a clear alternative. Given the present crisis, how does Bernstein believe the government should guarantee that needed steps are taken?

Add comment October 23rd, 2005

Federal Government to have minor role in coping with avian flu

As we await the detailed Federal plan for coping with an avian flu pandemic, it appears that the Federal Government intends to leave the primary responsibility to state and local governments. Think about this: tens of thousands of local governments, many with very limited resources, will have to cope with a disster the likes of which hasn’t been see for over 80 years. Every local government that does a poor job will help

the pandemic spread, causing greater problems for everyone.
If a bird-flu pandemic hits the United States, don’t expect to see the federal government riding to the rescue. “Communities, in large part, will be on their own,” predicts Pat Libbey, the executive director of the National Association of County and City Health Officials.

The federal role in such a pandemic would be largely policy-oriented and advisory, Libbey and local health officials explain. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention would issue technical advice to health care workers, such as what symptoms to watch for in the population, how to administer a vaccine or an antiviral, and which groups of patients should receive treatment first.

Add comment October 23rd, 2005