|Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, November 25 2012 @ 10:45 AM EST|
|Some truth to this. Given a choice between testing for very |
expensive and slightly effective and inexpensive and
effective, companies do make the revenue maximizing choice.
An academic did experience an amazing amount of drug company
blowback when he found that antibiotics treated most ulcers.
But...drug trials are not paid for by academia -- too much
cost. Neither is a lot of drug development. The reality is
that academia just does not have the money. We have done an
amazing job of making drugs too expensive to test.
Admittedly, if patents did not exist, we would find an
alternative funding mechanism that probably would be more in
line with govt incentives (cost reduction)...so this could
be good. OTOH, there are obvious non-patent-related way to
avoid ballooning coats...
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]