It wouldn't necessarily have to be a monopoly. There's such a thing as compulsory licensing and statutory licensing. That is, government(s) could decide that the patent is valid, but anybody can use it (without needing the patent holder's permission), as long as they pay the patent holder. And the government could decide to set the price.

Patent have reasonable terms. They will have a 20 year head start and then everyone will be competing with them. It's something that will be free in the same lifetime as the researchers, most likely. It's not abusive like current copyright that locks ideas for two generations.

> Long, hard labor should be rewarded. And it is.

Why do people ask for raises though? It is somewhat rewarded, but some people don't work long and hard and still have more money. Those working long and hard, having a big useable result want to be rewarded a little more.

doing just about anything with science is.

Why would patent be the root cause, they should have access to 2003 level of medicine. If patent was the only thing holding them back, you'd see them having 2000s level of healthcare, which wasn't bad by any stretch.