Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:At what cost (Score 1) 93

"this is our development cost for the drug, these are our costs for developing failed drugs, +30% profit margin."

That's not how for-profit companies work. Literally not a single company in the world operates that way.

Who is it, that you think will invest $2.5B into something that will take a decade and will almost certainly fail, on the promise of a 30% profit?

How VERY KIND it is for that company to lower the price to affordability for foreigners while screwing over their own countrymen by charging rates here that challenge even the deepest US pockets.

Yes, how truly awful for the US to contribute something positive to the rest of the world, for once.

In late 2020's instead of RIGHT NOW. D'you realize how much human misery that delay means?

Do you realize that that misery exists independently of Gilead, and they're the only ones to have done anything about it? They pulled together an insane amount of money and effort (and luck) and made a huge impact on that misery now and will likely help eradicate it in a few years. A single cured person is a positive change.

You, on the other hand, have opinions about what they should be "allowed" to charge, because you can imagine some ideal society where all of this is magically taken care of by state money.

In short: I know plenty of scientists who would be willing to work for nothing more than the betterment of society, but I don't know any investors who would contribute billions of dollars for the same goal.

Comment Re:At what cost (Score 1) 93

not how much they should sell it for to recoup their costs and make a reasonable profit, but by how much they thought they could/should get

That's literally the definition of capitalism. You know, that thing our entire way of life is based on.

Personally, I think all drugs ought to be developed with public research dollars.

Awesome! Please enclose your plan to increase NIH funding five-fold. Oh, and I guess also your plan to legally prevent private companies from investing in medical research... because apparently that's how our socialist planned economy works.

There's less incentive to work on PROFITABLE drugs and work on IMPORTANT drugs.(Think cures for cancer instead of Viagra.)

Can you name one other $1B+/year drug that you deem to be "unimportant"? Do you honestly think that a cure for any moderately common cancer wouldn't be stupendously profitable?

There's less incentive to falsify the result of drug trials so that you can get FDA approval and be able to sell the drugs

How many drugs can you name that were brought to market based on falsified results?

And, when a really cool drug is developed, such as the cure for HepC, EVERYONE gets it immediately, and Hepatitis C is eradicated or nearly eradicated.

As it stands, this will happen in the late 2020s when sofosbuvir goes off patent. Currently, it is licensed for generic manufacture in 90 developing countries, covering a patient population of 100 million.

That's 100 million people that would be shit out of luck in your magical world of wishful thinking and unicorn farts.

"I'm not afraid of dying, I just don't want to be there when it happens." -- Woody Allen