5 ms·

If the vaccine works, the big question is: who will buy it? The biggest market that I'd see is addicts who commit crimes and are required to have the treatment

by mbreese 15y ago

If the vaccine works, the big question is: who will buy it? The biggest market that I'd see is addicts who commit crimes and are required to have the treatment as part of a court ordered program. How big is that market? Pharma isn't about to spend millions on a phase III trial for a fairly small market. If they really want to see their vaccine approved for use, maybe they should start their own company to produce it. If there is enough of a need for the vaccine, the should be able to find funding (VC or grants). Now, I could really see their nicotine vaccine doing very well, since there are lots of people who would voluntarily take a vaccine to stop smoking.

skue 15y ago
I've worked at an addiction clinic. Addicts often do want to quit. Witness the success of disulfiram (Antabuse) and the numerous nicotine cessation products. They might not All want to quit All the time, but many of them hit their bottom and look for help. The problem is that it's hard to stay sober even if you try.
influx 15y ago
One could imagine the government making this mandatory for all newborns just like the many other child hood vaccines. In 20 years, you would eliminate all cocaine addicts, as anyone trying cocaine would not get high the first time. Interesting idea, not sure how practical or ethical it is though.
- marshray 15y ago
  I wonder if it would bind to some percentage of naturally-occurring stimulants in some percentage of the population. That's the kind of thing that can really can bring about the downfall of an entire civilization.
- SeoxyS 15y ago
  That goes against so many ethical and legal codes... This is how you end up with a repressed society.
- burgerbrain 15y ago
  Why don't you just suggest we start pumping the water full of happy-pills while you're at it?
  - nradov 15y ago
    Some have suggested adding trace amounts of lithium to drinking water in order to reduce depression and suicide. I don't think that's necessarily a good idea, but there is a scientific basis for it. http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/194/5/464.abstract http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/194/5/464.abstract
    - burgerbrain 15y ago
      Oh, I don't doubt that it would be possible to do it. I'm just saying that it's pretty much one of the canonical "Bad Ideas" (tm) from modern fiction. It ranks right up there with "stop talking about sharks, you're scaring away the tourists" and "lets split up so we can cover more ground".
felipemnoa 15y ago
Even if the market is small if they charge several thousand dollars for the overall treatment they could potentially make billions of dollars. Specially considering that they can expand to other addictive substances like nicotine.
- mbreese 15y ago
  So, you're going to charge addicts (who have likely bottomed out) several thousands of dollars?
  - felipemnoa 15y ago
    No, most probably the state (as in us) will have to pay for it. I don't understand your attitude. You want somebody to do all the work of bringing this new technology but then you don't want them to charge to at least recoup their investment and make some money for themselves.
knowtheory 15y ago
People don't seem to get how awesome this is. Sell it to parents. You can guarantee (for some period of time likely) that your children have an artificial tolerance for drug use w/o any ill effects. The only implication I would want to think about more is what happens next. If all or most high schoolers had been inoculated against hard drug use, does that just mean that people would buy larger quantities? Would the market simply adjust? Would more new designer drugs enter as alternatives?
- palish 15y ago
  "Sell it to parents. You can guarantee (for some period of time likely) that your children have an artificial tolerance for drug use w/o any ill effects." I don't understand what you're saying.
  - burgerbrain 15y ago
    He is saying that there might be a market for it among parents who want to remove from their children the ability to experience drugs.
    - palish 15y ago
      Right. And how would they do that? It sounds like you're advocating slipping your children some drug without their knowledge, in order to prevent them from doing cocaine. Protip: My mom slipped me anti-depressants while telling me they were "vitamins". When I found out, I never trusted her again. Ever. I felt violated. Do this at your own risk. Protip #2: If they want to do cocaine, you're not going to be able to stop them. I don't know the answer, but slipping your kids some anti-drug drug probably isn't it.
      - burgerbrain 15y ago
        "It sounds like you're advocating slipping your children some drug without their knowledge, in order to prevent them from doing cocaine." That appears to be what the original person you were responding to was suggesting. I share your concern.
nandemo 15y ago
> If the vaccine works, the big question is: who will buy it? Maybe people who are addicted and want to stop using?
- marshray 15y ago
  Or dealers will spike their injectables with it to make their addict clients all the more desperate? It's really rare to find an effective one-molecule solution to complex problems of human behavior.
  - nandemo 15y ago
    As the article says, some subjects continued using more and more cocaine but eventually stopped since they didn't get its effects (which is the whole point of the "vaccine"). Still, I'm skeptical as there's no mention of problems due to withdrawal.
- dfc 15y ago
  Thank you. I had the same reaction when I read the OP.
dfc 15y ago
Did you read the end of the article? Big pharma's concern is not the market size but the PR fallout from producing a vaccine that causes some users to buy 5x more coke than they had in the past. Why would there be enough demand for the drug to create funds from VCs and grants but nor enough demand for big pharma to do something? I have no idea about Phase 3 requirements but I imagine it is not a friendly to startups.
- mbreese 15y ago
  I read the entire article... they speculate that the concern of pharma is PR, but really, their guess is as good as mine as to why someone won't manufacture it.

by mbreese 15y ago

skue 15y ago

I've worked at an addiction clinic. Addicts often do want to quit. Witness the success of disulfiram (Antabuse) and the numerous nicotine cessation products. They might not All want to quit All the time, but many of them hit their bottom and look for help. The problem is that it's hard to stay sober even if you try.

influx 15y ago

One could imagine the government making this mandatory for all newborns just like the many other child hood vaccines. In 20 years, you would eliminate all cocaine addicts, as anyone trying cocaine would not get high the first time. Interesting idea, not sure how practical or ethical it is though.

marshray 15y ago
I wonder if it would bind to some percentage of naturally-occurring stimulants in some percentage of the population. That's the kind of thing that can really can bring about the downfall of an entire civilization.
SeoxyS 15y ago
That goes against so many ethical and legal codes... This is how you end up with a repressed society.
burgerbrain 15y ago
Why don't you just suggest we start pumping the water full of happy-pills while you're at it?
- nradov 15y ago
  Some have suggested adding trace amounts of lithium to drinking water in order to reduce depression and suicide. I don't think that's necessarily a good idea, but there is a scientific basis for it. http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/194/5/464.abstract http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/194/5/464.abstract
  - burgerbrain 15y ago
    Oh, I don't doubt that it would be possible to do it. I'm just saying that it's pretty much one of the canonical "Bad Ideas" (tm) from modern fiction. It ranks right up there with "stop talking about sharks, you're scaring away the tourists" and "lets split up so we can cover more ground".

felipemnoa 15y ago

Even if the market is small if they charge several thousand dollars for the overall treatment they could potentially make billions of dollars. Specially considering that they can expand to other addictive substances like nicotine.

mbreese 15y ago
So, you're going to charge addicts (who have likely bottomed out) several thousands of dollars?
- felipemnoa 15y ago
  No, most probably the state (as in us) will have to pay for it. I don't understand your attitude. You want somebody to do all the work of bringing this new technology but then you don't want them to charge to at least recoup their investment and make some money for themselves.

knowtheory 15y ago

People don't seem to get how awesome this is. Sell it to parents. You can guarantee (for some period of time likely) that your children have an artificial tolerance for drug use w/o any ill effects. The only implication I would want to think about more is what happens next. If all or most high schoolers had been inoculated against hard drug use, does that just mean that people would buy larger quantities? Would the market simply adjust? Would more new designer drugs enter as alternatives?

palish 15y ago
"Sell it to parents. You can guarantee (for some period of time likely) that your children have an artificial tolerance for drug use w/o any ill effects." I don't understand what you're saying.
- burgerbrain 15y ago
  He is saying that there might be a market for it among parents who want to remove from their children the ability to experience drugs.
  - palish 15y ago
    Right. And how would they do that? It sounds like you're advocating slipping your children some drug without their knowledge, in order to prevent them from doing cocaine. Protip: My mom slipped me anti-depressants while telling me they were "vitamins". When I found out, I never trusted her again. Ever. I felt violated. Do this at your own risk. Protip #2: If they want to do cocaine, you're not going to be able to stop them. I don't know the answer, but slipping your kids some anti-drug drug probably isn't it.
    - burgerbrain 15y ago
      "It sounds like you're advocating slipping your children some drug without their knowledge, in order to prevent them from doing cocaine." That appears to be what the original person you were responding to was suggesting. I share your concern.

nandemo 15y ago

> If the vaccine works, the big question is: who will buy it? Maybe people who are addicted and want to stop using?

marshray 15y ago
Or dealers will spike their injectables with it to make their addict clients all the more desperate? It's really rare to find an effective one-molecule solution to complex problems of human behavior.
- nandemo 15y ago
  As the article says, some subjects continued using more and more cocaine but eventually stopped since they didn't get its effects (which is the whole point of the "vaccine"). Still, I'm skeptical as there's no mention of problems due to withdrawal.
dfc 15y ago
Thank you. I had the same reaction when I read the OP.

dfc 15y ago

Did you read the end of the article? Big pharma's concern is not the market size but the PR fallout from producing a vaccine that causes some users to buy 5x more coke than they had in the past. Why would there be enough demand for the drug to create funds from VCs and grants but nor enough demand for big pharma to do something? I have no idea about Phase 3 requirements but I imagine it is not a friendly to startups.

mbreese 15y ago
I read the entire article... they speculate that the concern of pharma is PR, but really, their guess is as good as mine as to why someone won't manufacture it.