Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

still_one

(98,883 posts)

3. Really a stupid move. Besides the obvious ethical implications, if they would charge cost or no

Reply to Mike 03 (Original post)

Mon Jun 29, 2020, 11:34 AM

Jun 2020

cost for this application, it would provide valuable PR for a company that has been heavily critisized for the price gouging, especially regarding their Hepatitis C treatment

remdesivir is not going to be a huge money maker for this application, especially since there appears that other cheaper options may actually be more effective, (dexamethasone)

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

9 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Gilead's $2,340 price for coronavirus drug (Remdesivir) draws criticism [View all] Mike 03 Jun 2020 OP

This sentence seems important too: Mike 03 Jun 2020 #1

Is there -- is there -- balm in Gilead? soothsayer Jun 2020 #2

Really a stupid move. Besides the obvious ethical implications, if they would charge cost or no still_one Jun 2020 #3

You're asking a leopard to change its spots customerserviceguy Jun 2020 #4

Trump has already ordered 500,000 treatments at $2,340 each for $1.1 Billion cbdo2007 Jun 2020 #5

We need to fix the patent system for US funded research Midnightwalk Jun 2020 #6

I am surely in the minority here genxlib Jun 2020 #7

Do tell us ... GeorgeGist Jun 2020 #8

We hear about this BS all the time genxlib Jun 2020 #9