Fri Apr 13, 2018, 10:53 AM
sinkingfeeling (40,397 posts)
"Is curing patients a sustainable business model?" Goldman Sachs analysts ask
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2018/04/curing-disease-not-a-sustainable-business-model-goldman-sachs-analysts-say/?amp=1&__twitter_impression=true
One-shot cures for diseases are not great for business—more specifically, they’re bad for longterm profits—Goldman Sachs analysts noted in an April 10 report for biotech clients, first reported by CNBC. The potential to deliver “one shot cures” is one of the most attractive aspects of gene therapy, genetically engineered cell therapy, and gene editing. However, such treatments offer a very different outlook with regard to recurring revenue versus chronic therapies... While this proposition carries tremendous value for patients and society, it could represent a challenge for genome medicine developers looking for sustained cash flow. More at link on how the creepiest amongst us think.
|
16 replies, 1492 views
![]() |
Author | Time | Post |
![]() |
sinkingfeeling | Apr 2018 | OP |
marble falls | Apr 2018 | #1 | |
shraby | Apr 2018 | #2 | |
Girard442 | Apr 2018 | #3 | |
ismnotwasm | Apr 2018 | #4 | |
oberliner | Apr 2018 | #5 | |
fleur-de-lisa | Apr 2018 | #6 | |
FakeNoose | Apr 2018 | #7 | |
PoindexterOglethorpe | Apr 2018 | #15 | |
AJT | Apr 2018 | #8 | |
Farmer-Rick | Apr 2018 | #12 | |
Cal Carpenter | Apr 2018 | #9 | |
c-rational | Apr 2018 | #10 | |
Hoyt | Apr 2018 | #11 | |
exboyfil | Apr 2018 | #13 | |
unblock | Apr 2018 | #14 | |
Binkie The Clown | Apr 2018 | #16 |
Response to sinkingfeeling (Original post)
Fri Apr 13, 2018, 10:55 AM
marble falls (25,591 posts)
1. Talk about cold and callous.
Response to sinkingfeeling (Original post)
Fri Apr 13, 2018, 10:56 AM
shraby (21,946 posts)
2. I've suspected that was the game plan for years. Curing a disease cuts off the revenue.
Treating ad infinitum is very profitable indeed.
|
Response to sinkingfeeling (Original post)
Fri Apr 13, 2018, 10:56 AM
Girard442 (3,667 posts)
3. If that kind of thinking were carried to the max...
...the drug companies would be churning out tons products that it would be nearly impossibe to stop taking. But they wouldn't do that, right?
|
Response to sinkingfeeling (Original post)
Fri Apr 13, 2018, 10:56 AM
ismnotwasm (37,528 posts)
4. Utilitarianism at its worst
Like this study by Phillip Morris back in the day.
https://www.nytimes.com/2001/07/18/news/tobacco-giants-analysis-says-premature-deaths-cut-costs-in-pensions-and.html |
Response to sinkingfeeling (Original post)
Fri Apr 13, 2018, 10:57 AM
oberliner (58,724 posts)
5. It's definitely not
Much better to provide a medication that they have to take for the rest of their lives.
|
Response to sinkingfeeling (Original post)
Fri Apr 13, 2018, 10:57 AM
fleur-de-lisa (8,240 posts)
6. No worries. They'll just charge $500,000 for one-shot cures.
Those of us who cannot afford it can just fuck off and die.
![]() |
Response to sinkingfeeling (Original post)
Fri Apr 13, 2018, 11:00 AM
FakeNoose (13,121 posts)
7. When extremely wealthy people get cancer
...they go to Germany and get cured.
Just sayin' ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Response to FakeNoose (Reply #7)
Fri Apr 13, 2018, 11:48 AM
PoindexterOglethorpe (11,505 posts)
15. Germany can cure all cancers?
Huh. Wonder why I never heard of that before.
|
Response to sinkingfeeling (Original post)
Fri Apr 13, 2018, 11:01 AM
AJT (4,466 posts)
8. ain't free market capitalism grand.....
Response to AJT (Reply #8)
Fri Apr 13, 2018, 11:27 AM
Farmer-Rick (3,859 posts)
12. Yup, capitalism at it's finest...err worst
In a way, all doctors and pharmaceutical corporations are abject failures because they have yet to cure death.
The whole purpose of seeing doctors and taking medicine is to put off dying for a little while longer. But in the end we all die and doctors and pharmaceutical corporations are total failures. Just think how much money they could get from us if they kept us alive forever. |
Response to sinkingfeeling (Original post)
Fri Apr 13, 2018, 11:03 AM
Cal Carpenter (4,449 posts)
9. Perfectly logical in a capitalist system
![]() |
Response to sinkingfeeling (Original post)
Fri Apr 13, 2018, 11:13 AM
c-rational (685 posts)
10. Prevention is the best answer...better than a one shot cure. I recommend the movie "What The
Health" on Netflicks.
|
Response to sinkingfeeling (Original post)
Fri Apr 13, 2018, 11:20 AM
Hoyt (40,545 posts)
11. I think that depends on how much the "one shot cure" costs and whether people can afford it,
whether paying out-of-pocket, through an insurance company, or through single payer if we ever get there.
I guarantee a "one shot cure" for diabetes or cancer would be worth trillions. Not sure that will ever be accomplished, but the cure would be worth a ton, especially in terms of lives saved and savings in future health care expenditures. |
Response to Hoyt (Reply #11)
Fri Apr 13, 2018, 11:30 AM
exboyfil (12,049 posts)
13. Already a great example
The cure for blindness. $850K.
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/03/spark-therapeutics-luxturna-gene-therapy-will-cost-about-850000.html That is the reason why we need a rigorous public sector drug research program. |
Response to sinkingfeeling (Original post)
Fri Apr 13, 2018, 11:30 AM
unblock (43,653 posts)
14. The *analysis* isn't the problem.
It is what it is given the system we have. Really, this is just explaining the situation.
The problem lies in the ethical and policy conclusions. Do we alter our system to encourage long-term cures? Or do we deem it acceptable for health businesses to seek less-effective but more profitable treatments? It's what we do with this sort of analysis that matters. |
Response to sinkingfeeling (Original post)
Fri Apr 13, 2018, 12:12 PM
Binkie The Clown (5,289 posts)