Because it's a discovery rather than an invention. Though the mere concept of patents is already a fraud, as is clear when you start to look closely the arguments. See http://hintjens.com/blog:31.
And even if you don't buy that argument (it's admittedly tenuous) the fact that it's a discovery wouldn't convince me that the discoverer shouldn't still get exclusivity rights, given the amount of research involved in discovering new molecules and shepherding them through the approval process.
Could you possibly find something a little less conspiracy theory looking? Also something a little less manifesto.
Clearly his own blog.
if you think finding out which molecule fights cancer cells vs kills you outright and how to produce it in controlled fashion is trivial, you're a moron.
if you think creating genetically enginnered bacteria to produce insulin is trivial, you're an utter moron. lest you like injecting harvested insulin from pigs or dead humans.
HN likes to pride itself on techie knowledge, but the cluelessness around actual hard tech is staggering. modern medicine is up there with rocket science, worthy of nobel prizes.
they just CURED hep C for FUCKS SAKE. but yeah, no reward for that, but sharing catpics - here, have billions.
There are many other fields with very high barriers to entry and which require very large R&D budgets, but which - unlike the prescription drug market - nonetheless manage to attract competitiors: The semiconductor industry, for example, comes to mind.
pharma is full of competitors. exactly because it rewards risk. the whole point of the system. and the patent cliff hits and generics and biosimilars take over.