Paying to develop and scale a significantly improved treatment for a condition that affects many people is an altogether different proposition. > then why shou

Paying to develop and scale a significantly improved treatment for a condition that affects many people is an altogether different proposition. > then why shouldn't we? Ultimately, there's only so much economy to go around. What percentage of it are you willing to dedicate to treating that one condition? What about everything that can't be funded or produced as a result of that allocation?