5 ms·
> I hope they make billions in profits. No. We shouldn't be wasting resources on developing new antibiotics, because their effectiveness will be relatively sho
by codesushi42 7y ago
> I hope they make billions in profits.
No. We shouldn't be wasting resources on developing new antibiotics, because their effectiveness will be relatively short lived. We should focus on alternative sources, such as plants found in rainforests that are rapidly disappearing.
- maxerickson 7y agoBillions in profits would be verdant proof that the development effort was not wasted (because profit is a measure of value delivered…).
- codesushi42 7y agoShort term value and thinking.
- airstrike 7y agoCause who needs to pay employees and invest on future research, amirite?
- codesushi42 7y agoYou really think drug companies do either of those things adequately right now? That's a hoot.
- maxerickson 7y agoThe earth teems with people, we can do more than one thing at time. And short term value is still…value.
- codesushi42 7y agoJust like extracting oil shale. Or mining "clean" coal instead of investing in alternatives. Gotcha.
- maxerickson 7y agoThe apparent downside of burning carbon is much greater than the downside of developing drugs that will eventually become less useful.
- codesushi42 7y agoThey're not just less useful. You're creating new superbugs in the process. Meanwhile, rainforests are disappearing, which likely have plants that offer sustainable solutions. You're heading down an unwinnable path with antibiotics, and creating new superbugs. You're running out of time to discover a real fix, because rainforests are rapidly disappearing. So yeah, the analogy is apt.