3 ms·

Why don't the scientists actually doing the work of drug discovery just start a not-for-profit, since the executives and shareholders aren't actually adding any

Why don't the scientists actually doing the work of drug discovery just start a not-for-profit, since the executives and shareholders aren't actually adding any value to the customers here?

toomuchtodo 3y ago
Do you mean the NSF and NIH? Certainly, fund them with what currently goes to pharma for executives, shareholders, lobbying, and marketing. Fund meaningful work, not gravy for corporate performance artists (Part D is funded by general revenues, beneficiary premiums, and state contributions). Cut out the middleman. "In 2021, Medicare Part D covered more than 3,500 prescription drug products, with total gross spending of $216 billion, not accounting for rebates paid by drug manufacturers to pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs)." https://www.kff.org/medicare/issue-brief/a-small-number-of-drugs-account-for-a-large-share-of-medicare-part-d-spending/ https://www.kff.org/medicare/issue-brief/a-small-number-of-d... From this post: > Peter Maybarduk, the director of the Access to Medicines program at Public Citizen, a watchdog organization, who also testified at the hearing, hit back at the main pharmaceutical talking points along with Sanders. That included noting that the makers of the 10 drugs selected for the first round of Medicare price negotiation spent $10 billion more on self-enriching activities than R&D. ($200B/year buys a lot of manufacturing, distribution, admin, and whatever is left over for amortized and ongoing R&D)
- pompino 3y ago
  >Fund meaningful work, not gravy for corporate performance artists (Part D is funded by general revenues, beneficiary premiums, and state contributions). The problem is that nobody actually knows or can predict what "meaningful work" is because drug discovery is a graveyard with a >90% death rate.
Sabinus 3y ago
Because drug discovery needs patient trials, and the massive cost of those trails drives scientists into the arms of investors and the for-profit sector.
aaomidi 3y ago
not-for-profit companies are subject to a lot of bullshittery too.
asadotzler 3y ago
They did. They work for the US Government which does all the work of drug discovery which gets handed off, along with huge grants and other benefits, to private companies to productive and then sell at ridiculous profits that fuel massive executive pay packages and huge buybacks. The rich get richer while the taxpayers and most users of the ultimate product get screwed. It's really that simple.
pompino 3y ago
Because fundamentally most of science is a dead-end. Most of drug discovery is a further dead end with a 90% failure rate. Nobody wants to pay for it, and big-pharma uses a few blockbuster products to pay for all their other failures.

Why don't the scientists actually doing the work of drug discovery just start a not-for-profit, since the executives and shareholders aren't actually adding any value to the customers here?

toomuchtodo 3y ago

Do you mean the NSF and NIH? Certainly, fund them with what currently goes to pharma for executives, shareholders, lobbying, and marketing. Fund meaningful work, not gravy for corporate performance artists (Part D is funded by general revenues, beneficiary premiums, and state contributions). Cut out the middleman. "In 2021, Medicare Part D covered more than 3,500 prescription drug products, with total gross spending of $216 billion, not accounting for rebates paid by drug manufacturers to pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs)." https://www.kff.org/medicare/issue-brief/a-small-number-of-drugs-account-for-a-large-share-of-medicare-part-d-spending/ https://www.kff.org/medicare/issue-brief/a-small-number-of-d... From this post: > Peter Maybarduk, the director of the Access to Medicines program at Public Citizen, a watchdog organization, who also testified at the hearing, hit back at the main pharmaceutical talking points along with Sanders. That included noting that the makers of the 10 drugs selected for the first round of Medicare price negotiation spent $10 billion more on self-enriching activities than R&D. ($200B/year buys a lot of manufacturing, distribution, admin, and whatever is left over for amortized and ongoing R&D)

pompino 3y ago
>Fund meaningful work, not gravy for corporate performance artists (Part D is funded by general revenues, beneficiary premiums, and state contributions). The problem is that nobody actually knows or can predict what "meaningful work" is because drug discovery is a graveyard with a >90% death rate.

Sabinus 3y ago

Because drug discovery needs patient trials, and the massive cost of those trails drives scientists into the arms of investors and the for-profit sector.

aaomidi 3y ago

not-for-profit companies are subject to a lot of bullshittery too.

asadotzler 3y ago

They did. They work for the US Government which does all the work of drug discovery which gets handed off, along with huge grants and other benefits, to private companies to productive and then sell at ridiculous profits that fuel massive executive pay packages and huge buybacks. The rich get richer while the taxpayers and most users of the ultimate product get screwed. It's really that simple.

pompino 3y ago

Because fundamentally most of science is a dead-end. Most of drug discovery is a further dead end with a 90% failure rate. Nobody wants to pay for it, and big-pharma uses a few blockbuster products to pay for all their other failures.