Abstract

Patent-based intellectual property (IP) has come under progressively substantiative attack in the peer-reviewed literature as many studies have shown it retards innovation. In addition, the monopoly period no longer fits the innovation cycle. Although the vast majority of patents are not useful, patent proponents argue monopoly-based economic incentives are specifically necessary to fund medical technologies. Rather than use simple economics, quantifying human deaths has also been proposed as a means to guide public policies. Such an approach can be applied to patents by investigating the lives saved by patents as well as those lost in the current IP systems. This study is the first to provide such a theoretical approach to quantifying human mortality costs of patent-based IP systems. To illustrate the mechanism by which patents are responsible for premature deaths, a case study of the 100-year-old innovation of insulin is provided. The U.S. and Canada were selected to compare because the approach to drug costs in the two countries allows for a fraction of the additional costs of IP to be quantified. By comparing the different death rates of diabetics in U.S. and Canada, it was found that insulin-related patents result in over 94,000 American premature deaths annually (in 2021). The results also make it clear that many human deaths are related to price increases and lack of accessibility to needed medications due to the current monopolistic IP system. These findings require patent proponents to defend the continued existence of patents in the medical innovation space.