¶ … American government, and the governments of affected areas as well as with international agencies, such as the World Health Organization (WHO), on sharing related details of the drug such as its cost, development, and dissemination, without our relinquishing control of the distribution of the drug. It is, particularly, important that we maintain control since the affected population may not have access to health-care facilities, therefore commitment must be secured from relevant governments and international agencies that the drug will be distributed in a reliable, consistent, ethical, and above-board manner.
To that end, therefore, the drug will only be produced if our requirements on distribution are met. In my opinion, since Merck is a research company and distribution is not their specialty, Merck should not involve itself in that process. Moreover, marketing and distribution costs are high making it pragmatically more commonsensical that the money should be directed towards actual production of the drug or towards R&D activities than towards activities that the company can easily delegate to others.
It is also important that we include shareholders into our decision-making, informing them of the abstract value of the program and implementing guidelines to protect efficient and ethical distribution.
Additional guidelines should be structured for involved researchers and directors of research projects in order to bind them to ethical and reliable research methodologies and techniques. Cooperation should be established with governments and international agencies in informing them on Merck's intentions to alleviate diseases common in the developing world and the company's, consequent, expectation of government and other institutional interventions and relief. Examples of Merck's intentions, for instance, may include sinking a percentage of its budget into research for profit-free drugs that would be used to alleviate disease in certain Third World regions. Merck, accordingly, may wish to strike conventions with international agencies in order to share research and distribution costs.
As a utilitarian enterprise, where the greatest amount of good is being created for the largest possible number, the distribution should proceed with creating the drug. However, Merck's insisting on achieving this independently lessens the profitability of shareholders and organization (and pragmatically and ethically the organization has to consider the interests of its shareholders), so, to that end, it is recommended that Merck be liberated from the responsibilities of distribution and from associated costs.
Faults in the distribution strategy
It is of deepest concern that the distribution strategy mistakes urgency for convenience. The World Health Organization (WHO) has observed that six million individuals are at risk of loosing their sight, despite which the distribution coalition is still procrastinating preferring a geographical strategy to the urgent need to reach as many people in as fast a time as possible
The project of drug distribution faces tremendous challenges. There is the problem of inaccessibility. Most of the people in these impoverished areas live in regions that are unconnected by roads or any other transportation system, living far from hospitals, pharmacies, health personnel and institutions, and from any commercial system as it is understood in the conventional sense of the word. Superfluous drugs, therefore, languish in government warehouses or end up on the black market, raising additional dilemmas.
Keeping up with free distribution and criterion for stopping free distribution
As the distribution process picks up, it is evident that the organization was increasingly receiving support from civil groups and established health organizations. This means that the distribution strategy is likely to progress until the organization achieves its objectives thus eradicating river blindness. Consequently, the eradication of the ailment will determine the closure of the distribution program. Additionally, development or public health entities may incur distribution costs consequently relieving Merck.
How long can Merck keep up free distribution?
You’re 76% through this paper. Sign up to read the full paper.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.