What is the proper balance for pharmaceutical companies between delivering the fiduciary obligation of earning a profit for owners and providing life-saving or life-extending drugs to customers?

What is the proper balance for pharmaceutical companies between delivering the fiduciary obligation of earning a profit for owners and providing life-saving or life-extending drugs to customers? How much profit is too much profit and who determines the amount? How does that balance get achieved?

Should the United States consider other methods for controlling drug pricing, such as those used in some European countries? Are there other ways the United States might use market forces or incentives from government programs to control drug prices? Given that one of the most prevalent and persuasive arguments for relatively high drug prices is the high cost associated with research and development and regulatory compliance, is there a way to combat those costs?

What are your views on the role of patents in prescription medication? What is the proper balance of patent protection for costly research and development versus lack of competition?

What should be done on the issue of orphan drugs to combat high costs without viable alternatives? Should there be cost restrictions? Should there be patent restrictions?

What should be done in cases like Turing and Valent Pharmaceuticals, where decade-old medications that do not have competitors are purchased and prices are raised exponentially? If you think restrictions should be imposed, what is the justification for treating that case differently than the case where a drug with patent protection, comes to market and is priced for hundreds or thousands of dollars?

How can the United States and other developed countries stimulate greater research and development of treatment for NTDs and offer those drugs at affordable prices?