5 ms·
Considering that no, we dont have a few million per person than no, its not really a "bargain" unless you mean in the context of a pact with the devil.
by hobs 6y ago
Considering that no, we dont have a few million per person than no, its not really a "bargain" unless you mean in the context of a pact with the devil.
- maxerickson 6y agoNot everyone has cancer. And the price is sort of likely to come down if there is a technique that reliably treats cancer.
- mantap 6y agoYou can't just multiply the cost for 1 person by the number of people in the population. If it's mass produced it will be a lot cheaper. e.g. if you want to pay a chemist to synthesise Aspirin in a lab for you it will be very expensive. But it costs pennies in the store.
- tsimionescu 6y agoThat's only true if you can use the same aspirin as many other people. If the specific substance needs to be adjusted to your specific tumor, it may remain extremely expensive for a long time - until it becomes a technician's job to find your specific cancer signature and synthesize the drug from it.
- abiogenesis 6y agoIn this case "aspirin" is the equipment/software/education needed to perform this treatment; not the mRNA itself.
- tsimionescu 6y agoYes, this is what I meant by it being the technician's job. But building out a new commodity specialist job out of this new technology takes a lot more time than it takes to ramp up production of a regular drug.
- ponker 6y agoWell it depends why it costs a few million per person. If the production of the vaccine takes thousands of tons of coal and hundreds of pounds of bark of a slow-growing tree then yes, we don't have that per person. But if the current million dollar price is to enrich some pharma investors then there's nothing to say that society needs to find $100 trillion to enrich someone.