|
|
||||||||
HEALTH POLICY AND ETHICS |
Allison E. Aiello is with the Center for Social Epidemiology and Population Health, University of Michigan School of Public Health, Ann Arbor. Nicholas B. King is with the Department of Bioethics, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio. B. Foxman is with the School of Public Health and the Center for Molecular and Clinical Epidemiology of Infectious Diseases, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Correspondence: Requests for reprints should be sent to Allison E. Aiello, PhD, MS, Center for Social Epidemiology and Population Health, Department of Epidemiology, University of Michigan School of Public Health, 1214 S University, 2nd Floor, Ann Arbor, MI 481042548 (e-mail: aielloa{at}umich.edu).
Since the 1960s, scientists and pharmaceutical representatives have called for the advancement and development of new antimicrobial drugs to combat infectious diseases. In January 2005, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN), MD, introduced a biopreparedness bill that included provisions for patent extensions and tax incentives to stimulate industry research on new antimicrobials.
Although government stimulus for private development of new antimicrobials is important, it does not resolve long-standing conflicts of interest between private entities and society. Rising rates of antimicrobial resistance have only exacerbated these conflicts. We used methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus as a case study for reviewing these problems, and we have suggested alternative approaches that may halt the vicious cycle of resistance and obsolescence generated by the current model of antimicrobial production.
Read all eLetters
eLetters:
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |