5 ms·

Developing a new drug costs about $1 billion on average, from initial research to final testing and regulatory approval. A temporary monopoly of several years s

by TillE 16y ago

Developing a new drug costs about $1 billion on average, from initial research to final testing and regulatory approval. A temporary monopoly of several years seems entirely appropriate, even necessary if you expect private industry to be involved in pharmaceutical research.

ZeroGravitas 16y ago
Or so they keep telling us anyway: Does the pharmaceutical industry exaggerate their R&D costs? http://www.boingboing.net/2011/03/21/does-the-pharmaceuti.html http://www.boingboing.net/2011/03/21/does-the-pharmaceuti.ht...
- Locke1689 16y ago
  From the first comment on that article: I never post here, but after seeing this, I just had to. The Light article is very biased and disingenuous - they have an agenda that's obvious from the tone of their text. For a realistic rebuttal, check out: http://pipeline.corante.com/archives/2011/03/07/the_costs_of_drug_research_beginning_a_rebuttal.php http://pipeline.corante.com/archives/2011/03/07/the_costs_of... http://pipeline.corante.com/archives/2011/03/08/that_43_million_rd_figure.php http://pipeline.corante.com/archives/2011/03/08/that_43_mill... There are many other realistic, balanced rebuttals to the Light article out there as well. I've worked in the the biotech and drug industry (10 years) and am currently an academic. I've been on both sides of the fence and have a realistic perspective on how much it costs and how tough it is to discover and develop new medicines. The Light/Warburton figure is WAY off.
  - tesseract 16y ago
    Incidentally Pipeline is a blog I highly recommend if you are interested in chemistry or pharma.
  - ZeroGravitas 16y ago
    Note his rebuttal is mostly addressed to their own suggested $43 million figure, rather than disputing that the original $1+ billion figure is correct, as he seems to agree with the part of the paper discussing the problems with that number. There's an couple of orders of magnitude between the estimates, so it's entirely possible for both to be WAY off.
wazoox 16y ago
Then you discover that pharma spends 4 time as much in marketing than research. Kill patents, crush this evil, ugly beast!

by TillE 16y ago

ZeroGravitas 16y ago

Or so they keep telling us anyway: Does the pharmaceutical industry exaggerate their R&D costs? http://www.boingboing.net/2011/03/21/does-the-pharmaceuti.html http://www.boingboing.net/2011/03/21/does-the-pharmaceuti.ht...

Locke1689 16y ago
From the first comment on that article: I never post here, but after seeing this, I just had to. The Light article is very biased and disingenuous - they have an agenda that's obvious from the tone of their text. For a realistic rebuttal, check out: http://pipeline.corante.com/archives/2011/03/07/the_costs_of_drug_research_beginning_a_rebuttal.php http://pipeline.corante.com/archives/2011/03/07/the_costs_of... http://pipeline.corante.com/archives/2011/03/08/that_43_million_rd_figure.php http://pipeline.corante.com/archives/2011/03/08/that_43_mill... There are many other realistic, balanced rebuttals to the Light article out there as well. I've worked in the the biotech and drug industry (10 years) and am currently an academic. I've been on both sides of the fence and have a realistic perspective on how much it costs and how tough it is to discover and develop new medicines. The Light/Warburton figure is WAY off.
- tesseract 16y ago
  Incidentally Pipeline is a blog I highly recommend if you are interested in chemistry or pharma.
- ZeroGravitas 16y ago
  Note his rebuttal is mostly addressed to their own suggested $43 million figure, rather than disputing that the original $1+ billion figure is correct, as he seems to agree with the part of the paper discussing the problems with that number. There's an couple of orders of magnitude between the estimates, so it's entirely possible for both to be WAY off.

wazoox 16y ago

Then you discover that pharma spends 4 time as much in marketing than research. Kill patents, crush this evil, ugly beast!