2 ms·

The practice is so widespread that the FDA had to create an incubator/accelerator to incentivize drug-making for rare conditions: https://www.fda.gov/about-fda/

The practice is so widespread that the FDA had to create an incubator/accelerator to incentivize drug-making for rare conditions: https://www.fda.gov/about-fda/center-drug-evaluation-and-research-cder/rare-diseases-program https://www.fda.gov/about-fda/center-drug-evaluation-and-res... And that's separate from the Office of Orphan Products Development: https://www.fda.gov/about-fda/office-clinical-policy-and-programs/office-orphan-products-development https://www.fda.gov/about-fda/office-clinical-policy-and-pro... It's not a recent thing, too. Different programs have been enacted in the US going as far back as the Orphan Drug Act of 1983. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orphan_Drug_Act_of_1983 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orphan_Drug_Act_of_1983 Broader reading: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orphan_drug https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orphan_drug

bun_at_work 5y ago
You're saying hiding the discovery of novel, profitable, drugs because profits from the existing treatment is widespread? I'm not saying the pharma companies pursue all possible opportunities to research/create new drugs, just that it's ridiculous to think if they did find one, they would suppress that information. It seems conspiratorial. The Orphan drug act or incubators you link don't contradict the point I'm trying to make, but maybe that's on me.
- eganist 5y ago
  Your question: > Can you provide an example of a treatment people would like that 'big pharma' wouldn't produce because they couldn't make a profit on it? That's very different from: > You're saying hiding the discovery of novel, profitable, drugs because profits from the existing treatment is widespread?