• 𝘋𝘪𝘳𝘬
    link
    fedilink
    -236 months ago

    If this were true you wouldn’t hear from this at all.

    A permanent cure isn’t something that is wanted by pharma companies. It’s better for them to have something that keeps patients alive and that they need regularly and that is expensive but cheap enough for them to get.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      176 months ago

      But why wouldn’t a rival company just start up and sell the cures? Not all pharma companies sell insulin.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        16 months ago

        The bar to entry in the pharma market is extremely high. You need a lot of capital to enter it, which quickly disqualifies 95% of the population.

        Now of course, people without money can still get funding from investors. But those investors are already racking big profits from the continuous model of insulin treatments. A cure would be a detriment to their profits, so it’s not something they’re interested in funding. Not all pharma is insulin, but it’s one of the bigger pharma industries.

        This isn’t to mention that if you were one of the 5% and managed to have the resources to find and produce a cure, that the other mega corporations (with more funds than most of those 5% individuals) wouldn’t engage in anti competitive practices to shut you down. Many companies had good products but still ultimately failed.

        Unfortunately capitalism does not allow innovation to flourish like many of us were taught to believe.

      • 𝘋𝘪𝘳𝘬
        link
        fedilink
        -76 months ago

        Because then the rival company would also go out of business. The pharma industry is not about absolute cure but about continuously selling things - like all industries do. Medicine that cures you entirely and is not needed afterwards forever again is nothing the pharma industry wants.

        • AbsentBird
          link
          fedilink
          276 months ago

          Exactly, that’s why we’ll never have a vaccine for something like polio, it’s too profitable to make and sell iron lungs.

          • @BarbecueCowboy
            link
            English
            2
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            You joke, but that’s actually a really interesting story. Jonas Salk, the developer of the first polio vaccine was adamantly against even patenting it and claimed that it ‘belonged to the people’. There is some potential controversy there, but we mostly just think he was a pretty great dude. Dude’s a fucking hero regardless.

            I get the analogy you’re trying to make, but maybe want to switch to something else.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              46 months ago

              I get the analogy you’re trying to make, but maybe want to switch to something else.

              Like any other vaccine?

              • @BarbecueCowboy
                link
                English
                16 months ago

                Yeah, legitimately could choose just about anything else besides polio and it would have landed pretty well.

            • AbsentBird
              link
              fedilink
              3
              edit-2
              6 months ago

              I don’t really see how that goes against it. If anything it shows that some people will totally disregard profit in favor of bettering humanity. See also: the patent for insulin.