• ganymede@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    when anything is that important, the medicine must be opensourced 1.

    if so, and it’s handled correctly, you can still have body autonomy in those situations due to the resulting freedoms - much akin in nature to the software foss freedoms we all cherish. and in that sense, would not be a limit of “Your body, your choice". while still maintaining, if not increasing, the public protection to such threats.

    it was really refreshing to see some discussion in public health policy from some very smart and relevant people for opensourcing those medications. unsurprisingly it was swiftly shot down, but it was nice to at least see it taking place - which is a small positive change.

    1 naturally we decouple authentication and traceability from commercial interests. and ofc it does not mean noone gets paid

    • CharAhNalaar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      That’s definitely a valid concern, I don’t think private enterprises should hold the secrets to protecting people from deadly diseases.