3 ms·
No it’s also ludicrously expensive to R&D a drug, even if you just count the costs of the successful program. You’d be looking at easily $50-$150MM just in clin
by ethanbond 3y ago
No it’s also ludicrously expensive to R&D a drug, even if you just count the costs of the successful program. You’d be looking at easily $50-$150MM just in clinical trial costs, not to mention the years or decades of preclinical work.
Factor in the failed programs and you’re looking at about $2B of spend in order to bring a drug to market.
- Scandiravian 3y agoIf I remember correctly that cost is also only the price of developing a successful drug Several drug developments are halted before they reach market. Novo for instance lost a lot of money on their bet to develop inhalable insulin 15 years ago That cost also has to be recouped when finally hitting the jackpot
- FireBeyond 3y agoOf the top 10 pharma companies, 5 are American, and three of them rank 8th, 9th and 10th for R&D investment. So the whole "American big pharma needs to make a billion dollars a week in profit to recoup their R&D" is nothing but marketing fluff.
- tacticalturtle 3y agoDoes it matter that only some of them are headquartered in the US? Presumably those other companies also sell drugs in the US? I would think any company - regardless of where it’s headquartered - would seek to recoup R&D costs in a huge market like the US where prices aren’t capped by the government.
- ethanbond 3y agoI… am not following this. Novo Nordisk for example is a Danish company. I haven’t seen anyone say American pharma companies in particular need to make a ton of money. The American-specific topic is that American consumers pay a ton more for drugs. That can be chalked up to lack of single-payer making American consumers incredibly easy to bully/negotiate against + all the rent-seekers who sit at various points along the care delivery system.