A piece in this weekend's New York Post ("Shutting off the miracle-drug spigot") reminds us of the extraordinary stakes at play in the current healthcare debate, particularly when it comes to continued investment in pharmaceutical innovation.

Suggesting that some in Washington "are out to cut health-care costs at the expense of the research-intensive (as opposed to generic) pharmaceutical industry," it rightly points out:

 

.... Yet drugs often improve the span and quality of life in a remarkably cost-effective way. Innovative new drugs have helped many patients avoid costly hospitalization, for example. From 1980 to 2000, the number of days in the hospital per 100 people fell from 129.7 to 56.6, a drop of 56 percent--so that Americans avoided 206 million days of hospital care in 2000 alone, according to Medtap International, which provides health economics and outcomes-research services.

Our industry's promise to provide patients with the best care and therapies possible is built on a huge investment in innovation--$65 billion in 2008.  We recognize that this innovation is meaningless unless we are equally committed to ensuring access to our medicines.  So just as health care reform must broaden that access, it must also reflect the fact that our medicines help people 'do more, feel better and live longer,' as echoed in our corporate mission.  That is, they are implicitly part of the solution, and that critical piece is only made available through continued investment in cutting edge scientific research.  

The article continues, "even after drugs are approved for marketing, only about three in 10 now recoup their development costs."  This means, we make a lot of bets--smart, informed bets, but there is risk nonetheless.  As the Senate takes up consideration of their healthcare reform legislation, when it comes to innovation, patients deserve the best. We cannot afford to roll the dice.

(Image courtesy of Wikipedia.)