4 ms·
You assume pharmaceutical profits are all funnelled to R&D, rather than to shareholders. I see no reason why we shouldn't slash profit margins on medicine and o
by bccdee 2y ago
You assume pharmaceutical profits are all funnelled to R&D, rather than to shareholders. I see no reason why we shouldn't slash profit margins on medicine and offer the money back in earmarked grants.
So you see, I'm actually radically in favour of R&D.
- Aerroon 2y agoNo, I'm not assuming that. The profit motive is why they get the capital to do the R&D. I'm not just talking about developing an entirely novel drug but also manufacturing and testing it. Without the possibility of this outrageous profit we would just get less drug research done. That money would then be invested in something else. Drug prices wouldn't be so outrageous (probably), but we probably also wouldn't have as many treatment options. They might be too expensive now, but there's a chance they won't be in 50 years.
- bccdee 2y ago> The profit motive is why they get the capital to do the R&D. A massive amount of research is funded by public grants. iPhones are a famous example of a private-sector product almost entirely created off the back of public research. It is absolutely not true that private investment is required for pharmaceutical R&D.