Grandfather comment was: > This is one of the downsides of mobbing, shaming and regulating away outrageous prices. If pharma companies can't charge you in the

Grandfather comment was: > This is one of the downsides of mobbing, shaming and regulating away outrageous prices. If pharma companies can't charge you in the ballpark of a lifetime's earnings for a one-shot, one-shots will be less compelling to them compared with treatments you have to take twice a day for the rest of your life. Companies are run by human beings. Ignoring the stuff about "fidiciary duty" (mainly because I think it's highly contentious to infer that it overrides moral choices and partly because that is a highly complex topic in it's own right) - people can make choices that involve making less profit and saving lives. If you're not high enough up the food chain to make these decisions then you can choose to leave your job in protest. Therefore companies can choose to take the "less compelling" but more moral option. And I can judge them on their choices and so can you. And they can choose to disagree with our judgement. That's how morality works. Shades of grey and difficult choices... I think in addressing the GP comment I have hopefully addressed yours too. We all make our own moral decisions and we all make our own moral judgements. Just because these processes are complex and reasonable people can disagree doesn't mean that morality is meaningless. It's just means that it's hard.