3 ms·

I'm voting buried. No way Big Pharma is letting this one see the light of day.

mattdeboard 14y ago
Appropriate cynicism but I'd wager that an improved test for pancreatic cancer would garner them more money & market share than whatever treatments they've got for late-stage patients. Besides, finding it earlier == longer treatment periods == more money spent on medicine right? What's the smiley face for disappointment?
refurb 14y ago
Do you know of any technologies that Big Pharma has suppressed? I'd be interested to read about it!
- EricDeb 14y ago
  Well there's the male birth control method that is discussed on here occasionally. Apparently big Pharma does not want to pursue it because it's a one-off solution http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3773227 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3773227
  - refurb 14y ago
    But "not being interested" is not the same as "suppressing".
    - sukuriant 14y ago
      True; but, I think what they're trying to say is the spirit is the same. 1) Not interested. Why? Doesn't make us money. 2) Supressing. Why? Because this keeps us from making money.
- lostlogin 14y ago
  http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2010/1007.blake.html http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2010/1007.blake.ht... Interesting read about a great invention wasted.
  - refurb 14y ago
    I don't think that has anything to do with Big Pharma. That's the medical supply manufacturers using their supply chains to keep the little guys out.
    - drharris 14y ago
      Follow the money trail a bit farther and you'll see the pharmaceuticals on the horizon.
- ippisl 14y ago
  One example: "Drugs firm blocks cheap blindness cure: Company will only seek license for medicine that costs 100 times more " http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2006/jun/17/health.medicineandhealth http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2006/jun/17/health.medicin...
snowwrestler 14y ago
I love the irony in statements like this when they are comments on major media news stories. The story obviously is not being buried if Fast Company, Forbes, and other major news sites are covering it.
- drharris 14y ago
  The "buried" is not in relation to the story, but the product. You're telling me some Pharma company doesn't have a patent that will squash this in an instant? There's no way, not a single way, they're going to let some kid with a $3 test compete with their existing money makers. When have prices ever gone down in the pharmaceutical market?
  - snowwrestler 14y ago
    I buy Claritin over the counter at a price of about $40 for 200 pills. It used to cost $80 for 30 pills, and was only available by prescription. I don't think you understand economics. If Company A could sell this test for less than the tests available by Companies B and C, Company A will get more sales. If the product is much cheaper to manufacture, then they get better margins too. Any company in the world would jump at a chance for higher volumes at higher margins.

Appropriate cynicism but I'd wager that an improved test for pancreatic cancer would garner them more money & market share than whatever treatments they've got for late-stage patients. Besides, finding it earlier == longer treatment periods == more money spent on medicine right? What's the smiley face for disappointment?

refurb 14y ago

Do you know of any technologies that Big Pharma has suppressed? I'd be interested to read about it!

EricDeb 14y ago
Well there's the male birth control method that is discussed on here occasionally. Apparently big Pharma does not want to pursue it because it's a one-off solution http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3773227 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3773227
- refurb 14y ago
  But "not being interested" is not the same as "suppressing".
  - sukuriant 14y ago
    True; but, I think what they're trying to say is the spirit is the same. 1) Not interested. Why? Doesn't make us money. 2) Supressing. Why? Because this keeps us from making money.
lostlogin 14y ago
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2010/1007.blake.html http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2010/1007.blake.ht... Interesting read about a great invention wasted.
- refurb 14y ago
  I don't think that has anything to do with Big Pharma. That's the medical supply manufacturers using their supply chains to keep the little guys out.
  - drharris 14y ago
    Follow the money trail a bit farther and you'll see the pharmaceuticals on the horizon.
ippisl 14y ago
One example: "Drugs firm blocks cheap blindness cure: Company will only seek license for medicine that costs 100 times more " http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2006/jun/17/health.medicineandhealth http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2006/jun/17/health.medicin...

snowwrestler 14y ago

I love the irony in statements like this when they are comments on major media news stories. The story obviously is not being buried if Fast Company, Forbes, and other major news sites are covering it.

drharris 14y ago
The "buried" is not in relation to the story, but the product. You're telling me some Pharma company doesn't have a patent that will squash this in an instant? There's no way, not a single way, they're going to let some kid with a $3 test compete with their existing money makers. When have prices ever gone down in the pharmaceutical market?
- snowwrestler 14y ago
  I buy Claritin over the counter at a price of about $40 for 200 pills. It used to cost $80 for 30 pills, and was only available by prescription. I don't think you understand economics. If Company A could sell this test for less than the tests available by Companies B and C, Company A will get more sales. If the product is much cheaper to manufacture, then they get better margins too. Any company in the world would jump at a chance for higher volumes at higher margins.