That would be a start. Public healthcare, in the European model, would be ideal. It's true that it's a huge money sink, but that can be managed somewhat- by cost/benefit calculations, which sounds harsh and inhumane but is I think is justifiable.
I agree and maybe should have stated it more directly - I'm from Europe after all, and I enjoy the European model. Unfortunately, public healthcare doesn't fund drug development itself and, given the costs involved, it would probably be hard to make happen without serious reallocation of budgets in at least member states of EU (which wouldn't be a bad idea, for many reasons, but we both know it's not going to happen).
Well, it doesn't fund it directly, but I think, since the public is paying for the drugs, the companies that make them can afford to spend money on them, knowing that they will be able to sell them afterwards, even at a raised price (the public can afford a lot more than individuals can). So there's an indirecty subsidy on drug development, I guess.
Which is fine by me, to be perfectly clear. If people can access the drugs they need, then fine, let the companies make a profit, why not. I mean, within limits and all.
That would be a start. Public healthcare, in the European model, would be ideal. It's true that it's a huge money sink, but that can be managed somewhat- by cost/benefit calculations, which sounds harsh and inhumane but is I think is justifiable.