Read this piece in The Week magazine(Dec 4, 2005):

Zionnghaka,70, a tribal Christian cult leader, is a happy old man with 15 wives and more than 100 children. Though three wives deserted him and a few died, Zionnghaka faithfully followed tradition. Apparently he couldn't keep pace with his father Challianchana, the founder of the Channa cult which permits polygamy; he had 50 wives and unccountable children! The cult is now spread over four generations and boasts of 1,600 members. Hard work pays!

***************************************
So if you think that Tarzans no longer exist, think again!!

I stumbled over a dated (but interesting) set of numbers the other day. According to a study conducted by the US Department of Commerce, the US imported software worth $1.6 billion in 2002-03 from India. The report quoted a spokesperson of the Confederation of Indian Industry (CII) debunking the study and saying the Americans got it wrong. India actually exported $6.3 billion worth of software to the US in the same period.

A discrepancy of $4.7 billion? That's Rs 22,000 crore. I find it intriguing. Is something the matter here? For a moment, let's give the Indian software industry the benefit of doubt and assume the Americans got it all wrong, and that India actually exported software to the US worth $6.3 billion during the period.

Problem is, the assumption raises too many questions to which I have no answers.

Question #1: Somebody doesn't know how to count? Who is it—the Indians or the Americans?

Question #2: During the period under scrutiny, NASSCOM figures indicate total software exports from India were of the order of $9.5 billion. Of this, the top 20 Indian IT companies accounted for $4.5 billion. What it means is simply this: the Top 20 Indian software companies exported less than half what the industry as a whole could manage. I find this strange because I can't think of any other industry where the Top 20 companies contribute so little. Is the structure of our industry an aberration from what exists elsewhere?

Question #3: For the sake of an argument, let me assume the Indian IT industry is indeed an exception to the rule. That means, the Top 20 apart, there are software companies who collectively generate $5.1 billion (Rs 24,000 crore). For the period in question, I reckon there were close 800 software companies. To create this kind of money, wouldn't each of these software companies have generated on average Rs 30 crore?

Question #4: The latest statistics put out by Nasscom clearly indicate only 12 Indian IT companies generated revenues in excess of Rs 500 crore. After digging a little deeper to get a better picture, only 172 Indian companies earn over Rs 30 crore. This number was culled from a survey of India's Top 200 IT companies by the widely-respected Dataquest.

What do I believe now? That I don't know how to count or that these publicly available numbers are horribly wrong?

Question #5: There's an interesting theory I've heard at countless cocktail parties. Picture this. I have Rs 1 crore in black money. Because this money is unaccounted for, there is little good use I can put it to. To derive real value from it, the money ought to be legal.

To get around the problem, I take all my cash, go to the US and set up a mom-and-pop shop there. Even as I do that, I create a 'technology services provider' in India. This mom-and-pop shop of mine then places an order for software worth Rs 97 lakh from the company in India. I'm assuming Rs 3 lakh will be spent in setting up the whole racket and paying off a few operators. What I get now is white money. I report this income to the authorities as legitimate software export earnings, pay my taxes and walk away into the sunset. Indian authorities record the exports. The Americans don't see it because nothing ever got imported. Nobody's wiser.

Am I just the victim of an imagination gone wild?

Call me naive. I don't care. But deep down, I find this whole business of clinical trials so terribly unethical. But damn my ethics. Consider these numbers.

The business of pharmaceutical and medical device clinical trials is a $15 billion per year business in the U.S., and $35 to $40 billion globally. U.S.-based spending on clinical trials is growing fast – at a 12 percent per year pace that should generate $26.5 billion by 2007. So far, so good. But this is where my problem lies. There are more than 2,500 FDA clinical trials underway in the U.S. for new drugs. Because Phase II trials often use up to several hundred people and Phase III trials often require several thousand people, the need for a very large ‘patient market’ with a particular disease is enormous. The problem for biotech, pharmaceutical, and medical device companies is that it is increasingly difficult and expensive to find the large pools of people needed to thoroughly test new drugs and devices.

Enter India. With a billion people and a few hundred million below the poverty line, hundreds of thousands are queuing up to offer their bodies to be tested. For pharma companies, India is turning out to be the cheapest alternative anywhere in the world and they're queuing up by the dozen.

Reports Red Herring in a recent story on how India is emerging as the new drug trial hotspot, India appeals to businesses trying to run clinical trials because not only is it relatively easy to find treatment-naive patients, there is also a low attrition rate among them while participating in long trials. In an interview in India Abroad, Santosh Hegde, a business development executive for clinical testing management company Neeman Medical International, explained that “Indian patients have the highest return rate in the world, so critical time is not lost by patients dropping out of trials.”

There's money to be made. Fuck!