Absolutely I don't have a problem with them licensing technology when developing the vaccine. There are certain problems in the current intellectual property regime, especially as it relates to the biological sciences and information. But as long as those rules exist, pharmaceutical corporations like Merck and CSL should play by the rules. Do you disagree? Do you think CSL should have abandoned their intellectual property to Merck and given up a potential stream of royalties? Or that Merck should have broken their agreements with CSL?
"In 1995, Merck entered into a license agreement and collaboration with CSL Limited relating to technology used in GARDASIL. GARDASIL also is the subject of other third-party licensing agreements."
Here's the part that I think I unconsciously flagged. That last sentence. Who are the "other third party" agreements with? With anything ground-breaking like this, I want as much concrete and finite data as are available.
I don't know for sure that it's NOT harmless. But I'd rather be at least more sure than I am before we risk our little girls. I don't think I'm being an alarmist, but bit and pieces I read about it and the way it's being rush-forced cause me to be...more cautious than I should be?