Would you kill one person to save five?

Daily Debate #629: "Would you kill one person to save five?". You are arguing AGAINST the motion. Your opponent: Richard Feynman.

access to essential medicines should be considered a universal human right even if it impacts pharmacutical profits

You're fighting the wrong battle. Kill pharma profits and you kill the innovation pipeline—no new drugs get invented. The real moral crime is people dying waiting for medicines that don't exist yet because companies couldn't afford R&D.

i think it should be funded by the goverment. alot of patients cannot afford the cost of prescribed medicines. people should not die because of their income.

Government funding just means taxpayers foot the bill either way—you're not erasing the cost, you're hiding it. And when governments negotiate prices down, pharma stops investing in rare diseases because the math doesn't work. Who suffers then?

you should know countries with successful universal healthcare system do exist. united kingdom, canada, australia and germany these system arent perfect but they consistently out perform the us

Those systems ration care—Brits wait months for surgery while Americans get it next week. You're comparing apples to corpses. Which is the real human right, access or speed? Pick one.