The incentives are to make money, not to keep people sick. You can charge a lot more for a cure than a treatment, and the empirical evidence of new cures for ge

The incentives are to make money, not to keep people sick. You can charge a lot more for a cure than a treatment, and the empirical evidence of new cures for genetic diseases and subtypes of cancers in the past couple years is showing a lot more activity there. Gilead made bank on curing hep C, even with all the political backlash to the price. It's a competitive environment - if your drug treats and your competitor cures, you don't have the luxury of charging money since your competitor will be getting all the patients. The incentives for antibiotics are different though. Because of antibiotic resistance, society would rather not use the best antibiotic unless absolutely needed so we have a backup. So the better the antibiotic, the less people want to use it. In that case yes the incentives are completely broken.