Sadly I read this as a thinly veiled attempt to argue for Congress to fund anti-bioitic research. Why? Well the article practically spells out the why: pharma

Sadly I read this as a thinly veiled attempt to argue for Congress to fund anti-bioitic research. Why? Well the article practically spells out the why: pharma is not incentivised to bring new anti-biotics to market, but they can create lots of "new" ones that are similar to the old ones. Why not change the model, and create a system where pharma companies can churn out "new and innovative" anti-biotics, for a nice guaranteed government payout. "Win win" for pharma, politicians, and who knows - maybe farmers and people? Cynical? Extremely. An element of truth in my view? Almost certainly. The way I view it - we have too many different options available on the market. We should look to remove a decent % of them from circulation in as many countries as possible, to allow any resistant strains to lose their resistance. Yes, this would impact pharma companies, but their could be a rotational system with extensions to patents as required to keep them happy.