4 ms·
I at least appreciate the fact that Gilead produced a cure, rather than just a treatment. Medical research has taken a frightening turn in the last decade towa
by kolbe 13y ago
I at least appreciate the fact that Gilead produced a cure, rather than just a treatment. Medical research has taken a frightening turn in the last decade towards working on treatments that patients will have to take (and pay for) the rest of their life, rather than cures. Already, we're looking at a potential drug-resistant bacteria epidemic thanks largely to the fact that antibiotics are just taken a few weeks at a time. So, at least they're charging $90k to cure Hep C, rather than taking $10 out of your pocket every day for the rest of your life?
- thenmar 13y agoCan you provide more info about this? That medical researchers are actively avoiding looking for cures for diseases? It just screams "baseless conspiracy theory" to me. And what do antibiotics have to do with it? As far as I know, antibiotic resistant bacteria are the result of factory farms pumping animals full of antibiotics, and patients simply not completing the full course of drugs once they feel better.
- kolbe 13y agoIt was a comment in a Frontline episode[1]. If my memory serves me correctly, one of the top researchers claimed that they could conquor this problem, but nearly every drug company has cut funding for antibiotics research, as it doesn't result in long-term usage. [1] http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/hunting-the-nightmare-bacteria/ http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/hunting-the-nightmar...
- refurb 13y agoThe biggest reason why drug companies don't invest in antibiotics is because if you come up with the best antibiotic ever, it will never get used because docs will save it for the sickest patients. Hence, you'll never make much money on an antibiotic and likely not even turn a profit.