4 - The Michigan Daily - Wednesday, January 19, 2005 OPINION Um 420 MAYNARD STREET ANN ARBOR, MI 48109 ~iyeShdiijau& dI tothedaily@michigandaily.com EDITED AND MANAGED BY STUDENTS AT THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN SINCE 1890 JORDAN SCHRADER Editor in Chief JASON Z. PESICK Editorial Page Editor Unless otherwise noted, unsigned editorials reflect the opinion of the majority of the Daily's editorial board. All other pieces do not necessarily reflect the opinion of The Michigan Daily. NOTABLE QUOTABLE It only got down to 28 below, and that's nothing. That's no big deal." - Christine Mackai, the town clerk of Embarrass, Minn., on the tempera- ture last Thursday. The temperature in Embarrass reached negative 54 degrees on Monday, according to CNN.com. SAM BUTLER . iE:SOAPBX 'a1r 3S 140a' c..,. f.. $c~c~o .\ $ u O Ni4r" Public health, not profits SUHAEL MOMIN AN ALTERNATIVE SPN In a perverse manifesta- tion of corporate greed, pharmaceutical com- panies and their allies in government have once again placed profits ahead of public health. Under pressure from domestic as well as inter- national drug manufactur- ers, the Indian Parliament is poised to approve a government order that would effectively ban the production of all generic medica- tions, including those that treat HIV/AIDS. Classified as "antiretrovirals," these anti-HIV drugs have dramatically improved the life expec- tancy, as well as quality of life, for individuals afflicted with the HIV virus. In the past, cocktails of ARV drugs were prohibitively expensive; a yearlong course of treatment would run upward of $12,000. However, the advent of generic knock- offs, many coming from India, reduced the cost to under $400 per year. In many poor African nations, this dramatic fall in price enabled govern- ment health agencies to administer the life-extend- ing drugs at a very low cost. In 2003, in an effort to address the exploding AIDS crisis in southern Africa, the Clinton Foundation brokered a deal between the Republic of South Africa and a hand- ful of generic drug manufacturers to provide ARV treatment at $140 per patient per year. As reported by The New York Times, generic pharmaceuticals in India have become tremen- dously successful because national patent laws pro- tect the production pathway used to synthesize the drugs, not the actual drugs. However, as The Times reports, efforts to bring India in line with the World Trade Organization's agreement on intellectual property have led the government to order statutory changes. Generic drug companies would have to receive specific permission to make a generic drug, while name-brand manufacturers would be able to "evergreen" - extend their patents by simply changing the form, such as from capsule to syrup, of their medication. These changes would cripple the generic drug industry, but India's Parliament, which must approve the order before it goes into effect, does not seem likely to protest. ARV treatments, while not cures, can extend the lifespan of HIV-positive individuals by decades when properly administered. The assault on Indian generic drug manufacturers may protect sizeable profits for name-brand pharmaceuticals, but at what social cost? The magnitude of the public health crisis posed by HIV/AIDS in sub-Saharan Africa defies com- prehension. In South Africa, where the government has been notoriously ineffective at combating the spread of HIV, about 25 percent of the adult popula- tion has tested positive for the virus. The implica- tions are dire. Considering that the HIV/AIDS life expectancy without ARV treatment is less than a decade, South Africa is facing the imminent loss of a huge portion of its workforce and a massive eco- nomic contraction. More disturbingly, if ARV treat- ment is not expanded dramatically, almost one out of every 10 citizens in South Africa will be orphaned within the next decade. The South African social service system is prepared neither financially nor logistically to accommodate such a huge influx of parentless children. The pharmaceutical industry is by far one of the most profitable of all the major industries. This is in no small part due to government patent protections. Rapid advancements in drug technology ensure that pharmaceuticals are almost always obsolete before their patent protections expire; thus, drug companies virtually always charge monopoly prices for their products. Of course, arguing that drugs should have no patent protections is absurd. The short-term right to charge monopoly prices ensures that pharma- ceutical companies have incentives to innovate and further the frontiers of medicine. An equitable bal- ance between protecting intellectual property and the future of pharmaceutical research while secur- ing care and treatment to individuals afflicted by a spreading pandemic must be established. Canada appears ready to implement a respon- sible generic drug policy that protects pharma- ceutical companies and simultaneously addresses the HIV/AIDS crisis in the developing world. In May 2004, the Canadian Senate approved a bill amending the country's patent laws to allow the government to bypass patent protections and allow pharmaceutical manufacturers to produce and export generic drugs for use in developing nations. This protects profits in richer nations where patients can afford name-brand ARV drugs while enabling generics to be distributed to the vast majority of HIV/AIDS sufferers who cannot. Assuming Canada follows through on its legisla- tion, it will set a fine example for the developed - and in India's case, developing - world. Momin can be reached at smomin@umich.edu. LETTER TO THE EDITOR Students should oppose Social Security privatization TO THE DAILY: Social Security is probably not something that most students think about. Retirement is a long time away and even then you hope that you will have been successful enough not to depend exclusively on Social Security benefits, especially because you are now investing in an education from one the country's best universities. So the recent talk about President Bush's plan to priva- tize Social Security may seem more relevant to workers without college educations and people about to retire. However, students concerned with how we as a society treat those needing assistance should oppose the privatization of the program. Social Security is based on the idea that we have a moral obligation to care for the elderly, disabled and disadvantaged who cannot take care of themselves. Bush's plan would turn this idea on its head and would turn something called Social Security into "personal risk" by having workers put their payroll taxes in the stock mar- ket. Considering that the program was created in response to the biggest stock market crash in history, it's pretty stupid to make the program rely on the market when it is supposed to protect you from the unreliability of the market. Making investments is fine, but in the event of an eco- nomic downturn, people shouldn't have to spend their golden years in poverty, which was the case before Social Security was in place. Private accounts would leave little for individuals to live off of if they make bad investments. Social Security is not about you saving money for yourself. It's about ensuring financial secu- rity now for those who cannot work so that when you are in that position you will be pro- vided for as well. Privatization undermines the social responsibility and financial security of all involved. Since its inception, Social Security has kept millions out of poverty by providing a guar- anteed safety net and protecting them from the whims of an unpredictable economic system, not forcing them to suffer the consequences. In the coming weeks, Bush will embark upon a massive campaign to convince the public that Social Security, a program that practically pays for itself, is going bankrupt, not because of the soaring deficits, tax cuts or the surplus he gave away to the rich, but because of some as of yet unknown reason. Don't let him mislead the pub- lic yet again into more mistakes. David Guzman LSA senior LETTERS POLICY The Michigan Daily welcomes letters from all of its readers. Letters from University students, faculty, staff and administrators will be given priority over others. Letters should include the writer's name, college and school year or other University affiliation. The Daily will not print any letter containing statements that cannot be verified. Letters should be kept to approxi- mately 300 words. The Michigan Daily reserves the right to edit for length, clarity and accuracy. Longer "viewpoints" may be arranged with an editor. Letters will be run according to order received and the amount of space available. Letters should be sent over e-mail to tothedaily@michigandaily.com or mailed to the Daily at 420 Maynard St. Editors can be reached via e-mail at editpage.editors @umich. edu. Letters e-mailed to the Daily will be given priority over those dropped off in person or sent via the U.S. Postal Service. a VIEWPOINT An unaffordable education 40 By ERIN GODwIN I always dreamed of going to a prestigious school and chatting with goofy academic types in cozy coffeehouses. Instead, I ended up at South- west Missouri State University. This was a huge disappointment for me, but I tried to accept it for the sake of my family, which could not afford to send me anywhere better. I first learned of the University of Michigan when I visited it with my then-boyfriend over the summer. Though it was too late to apply as an incoming freshman, I wanted to go there. How- ever, I expressed uncertainty as to whether it was economically feasible, seeing as my parents are not rich. They have cars that need fixing, are still trying to pay off the house they bought the same year I was born and hope to retire in the next 15 years. Regardless of what the government may believe, paying roughly $37,000 per year for me to attend college is impossible for my family. My boyfriend still insisted that if I wanted to go to the University, I could find a way. I was skeptical college despite being over 500 miles away. I started thinking of myself as a future Wolverine. Once my allegiance to was established, I began work on the money problem. With no savings, I am financially dependent on my parents for college, but they refused to tap their savings or risk their retirement for a loan. Filled with defiant determi- nation, I came up with a complex financial plan including scholarships, financial aid, part-time and summer jobs, as well as medical studies for me and the dreaded loans. Then, to explain my devotion to the University and my plan to pay for it, I created a 108-slide PowerPoint presentation. I finally showed my PowerPoint presentation to my father and during slide 25 he suddenly stood up from the computer and walked away. My single-minded determination wasn't yet ready to die, but then the Office of Financial Aid informed me that as an out-of-state transfer student, I didn't qualify for scholarships or financial aid. Now I would have to convince my father to sign for an even bigger loan. My dad, now 50, has been working since he The simple truth is that I will never be able to afford the University, even as a graduate stu- dent. It isn't just minorities and the poor who can't afford a school like the University, a school that claims to desire racial, ethnic and economic diversity on campus and yet has outrageously high tuition. I am from a middle-class family and because I wasn't fortunate enough to be born in Michigan, I will never know what it is like to be at a school like the University. Doing well in high school means nothing. It is money that really determines where you will find yourself in life. I can do well in college, but in the end, it is the kids with the connections, the cash, and the college degrees from a swanky schools who will be tomorrow's leaders. The anti-affirma- tive action advocates talk about how applicants may or may not have been denied admission because they were white, but it is often debatable as to why someone is rejected. What about the people who are accepted but are unable to attend because of tuition while people with money who are less serious and qualified do? Who is mourn-