Monday, December 30, 2013

Gilead Sciences Inc. Requires $84,000 Ransom before Freeing Hostages of Hepatitis C: Clearly Christ was a Poor Business Man.



How much is a life worth?  Apparently saviors and holy men are not the only ones to place a high value on human life.  Thugs have been doing it for centuries, though usually not legally.  Kidnap someone’s precious and he’ll pay you whatever he can get his hand on morally or immorally.  The Supreme Court has basically ruled corporations are people, a notion I wrote off as ridiculous, but maybe it’s not.  The drug company, Gilead Sciences Inc., the manufactures of sofosbuvir, sold as Sovaldi, is charging $1,000.00 per pill in a treatment price that will cost patients $84,000.00 to save their lives.
In a recent interview with NPR (see link below), Gregg Alton, a vice president at Gilead, said, "We didn't really say, 'We want to charge $1,000 a pill…. We're just looking at what we think was a fair price for the value that we're bringing into the health care system and to the patients."

This makes me think that Christ, though savior of the world, was clearly a horrid business man.  How much could Living Christ Miracles Incorporated have charged to bring Lazarus back from the dead?  How much could Living Christ Miracles Incorporated have pumped into not only the economy of Jerusalem, but into the economy the entire middle east, even the Roman Empire?  Just think, Jerusalem could have had the greatest healthcare system of the ancient world if Christ had only known “how to charge a fair price for the value” he was “bringing into the health care system and to [His] patients."
As a society, we know, unlike Christ, we fall short of perfection—some of us, like Gregg Alton, very short of perfection.  That is why we regulate. That’s why it is illegal for me to march into a millionaire’s home, kidnap his daughter and put an $84,000 ransom on her sweet, blond head.  Yet, for some reason, as a society we feel, on the one hand, corporations should have the free-speech rights of an individual, and yet on the other hand, none of the legal responsibility of an individual.

I know I’m over-simplifying.  I’m doing it on purpose.  Sometimes morality is simple.  Sometimes evil is clear.  It is, without question, evil to charge $1,000 for a pill that costs at the very highest estimates $100 per pill—especially when that pill means the difference between life and death.

In a world without the influences of Satan, one would be fundraising to provide $100 pills that could save someone’s life for free rather than charging 10 times that to line the pockets of CEO’s and stock holders. 
But there is evil in this world and it is not always only associated with the pornography industry.  It’s time Christians, and anyone else with moral values, regardless of creed, stand together and demand a moral society.  Universal, affordable healthcare is part of that society.  Christ didn’t heal only those who could afford it and neither should society.  Blood ransom is not moral in any circumstance.
This, I know, is simple thinking.  Morality often is.
NPR is a little more objective than I am, and you can access their blog through the links below. 


Postscript:   Morality Is Simple, but Not Easy:  Hypocrisy Comes Naturally


I’m not sure why I blog, other than that there is something deeply satisfying about putting thoughts to page and getting them out there to an audience, no matter how small, almost immediately.  It comes close to the satisfaction one receives giving a public reading. 

But, like a public reading, it has its drawbacks.  One is it’s difficult to take back what you put out there into the universe.  Of course, this is true with all forms of communication, but because traditional publication is such a long, drawn-out process, with lots of polite rejections prior to acceptance, not to mention the revision dialogue after acceptance, there is lots of time to reflect prior to publication.

Anyway, my previous blog post doesn’t sit well with me.  I used some faulty logic and cheap propaganda techniques, but that’s not what bothers me.  Some things need to be said.  Sometimes it’s better to say something rash, out of anger, than say nothing at all.  What bothers me is that I made a personal attack against someone I absolutely do not know: Gregg Alton, a vice-president for Gilead Sciences Inc.

As a society, we know, unlike Christ, we fall short of perfection—some of us, like Gregg Alton, very short of perfection. 

I have no way of knowing how far short of perfection Gregg Alton falls.  For all I know, he’s a wonderful father, a kind supervisor, and perhaps even very generous with his donations to the community.  And to be honest, if I was a vice president for a drug company that basically developed a miracle drug, I too might be tempted with the following thought:

"We didn't really say, 'We want to charge $1,000 a pill…. We're just looking at what we think was a fair price for the value that we're bringing into the health care system and to the patients."

Although that's a natural human reaction to success, it doesn’t justify the price.  I stand by my claim that in effect Gilead Sciences Inc. is requiring an $84,000 ransom before freeing hostages of Hepatitis C.   That act simply is immoral.

But speaking out against policy and attacking individuals are two very different things.  Though I consider myself overall to be a good person, I have sank to some pretty deplorable acts in my past.  I am in no position to judge the content of character of others. 

Thus, the need to apologize:  My readership is small, and I doubt Greg Alton will ever read my post on Gilead Sciences, Inc. but that doesn’t change the fact that my attack was wrong.

I could erase my previous post, but I don’t want to.  Though flawed, it makes some good points.  So instead, I will attach this to it.    

Hopefully, I learn to reflect a little before hitting the “publish” button and don’t have to do this too often.

1 comment:

  1. Nice post Steve. It is hard to understand why the obvious is not obvious. We've been led to believe that nothing exists without the marketplace. How do you explain the consciousness of a child? The question why is why because it is intrinsically satisfying.

    ReplyDelete