Merck & Co., (A)

Case analysis

In 1978, Dr. P. Roy Vagelos, head of the Merck research labs, was faced with an ethical dilemma whether to invest in research for a river blindness disease drag.

Main parties involved in this ethical dilemma are Roy Vagelos and millions of poor people infected with parasite or being at risk to be infected. Roy Vagelos has a corporate economic concern to raise the profitability of the company by means of new products (drags). However, Vagelos has a concern that the research of the river blindness drag would not be economically beneficial, as the disease mentioned above is so rare and the infected people were so poor to pay that the sales of the drug probably wouldn't give an opportunity for the company to recoup the investment in research. The head of the Merck & Co. also had an ethical concern to help poor people to survive, as the philosophy of the company was to investigate drags for people not just for money. Millions of infected (or at risk to b infected) people have a concern to have access to a drag, which would kill the parasite without bad side effects.
Join now!


Possible alternatives for Dr. Vagelos actions are:

) Fund the research toward a treatment for river blindness

2) Don't fund the research toward a treatment for river blindness

3) Fund the research toward a treatment for river blindness only in case of support by the Government or international aid organizations

As far as the question of funding or not funding of the research is considered, I would recommend Merck & Co. to fund it (alternative 2 can be omitted), as, according to the case, a significant amount of money had already been invested in ...

This is a preview of the whole essay