3 ms·
Apparently not. This article (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/pharmaceuticalsandchemicals/9010738/The-battle-to-discover-new-antibiotics.html h
by majc2 12y ago
Apparently not. This article (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/pharmaceuticalsandchemicals/9010738/The-battle-to-discover-new-antibiotics.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/pharmaceutic...) suggests its a case of economics. That is new antibiotics would be kept back as a last line of defence only; therefore not as profitable.
- DennisP 12y agoIf we were a rational species, we would recognize we're at war with another species that's killing millions of us, and spend a portion of our military budget on antibiotics research, instead of leaving it all up to the private sector. We spend tax money on defense because it's a public good and in the absence of tax dollars there's no money in it. The same applies here.
- maxerickson 12y agoIt isn't what you mean, but DARPA does fund medical research, including treatments for infection. And USAMRIID ends up doing some research into treatments.
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]