> For the rest, I wouldn't know why there wouldn't be multiple medicines. Labs would still come up with multiple compounds that have more or less the same resul

> For the rest, I wouldn't know why there wouldn't be multiple medicines. Labs would still come up with multiple compounds that have more or less the same result, and if not, research would continue for the people who fall outside the bell curve of the other medicine. The issue is that this process happens right now because of independent development due to competition. As soon as you unify multiple efforts into one cooperative effort, you no longer have multiple efforts that produce multiple viable drugs. You're appealing to unify research efforts to put more wood behind fewer arrows to help people. And that's fine. It just that this has consequences, not all of which would likely be ones you want. So, yes, the resulting medicine would BE the generic. And that's great! But there is a drawback. And these are just the consequences we can easily predict. We haven't even thought about the psychological effects of enforced monoculture yet.