• ChowJeeBai@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 years ago

    Meanwhile volvo assigns the patent for the 3-point seatbelt to the public domain because it will save countless lives.

          • TeenieBopper@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 years ago

            Right. But based on context clues, it’s implied that the full meaning of the post was “Volvo did something for the public good, therefor Volvo is good. Volvo is a Swedish company. Swedish companies are good. Sweden is in Europe. European countries are good. American countries are bad. Novo Nordisk did something bad. It must be an American company.”

            Admittedly, my mistake was not being more clear about the point of my response which is that geography is irrelevant - capitalism and all companies are evil (or at best, amoral).

            • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 years ago

              That was in no way what I was saying, which about U.S. companies pretty much never doing the right thing and European companies actually doing that sometimes.

  • unreasonabro@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 years ago

    obviously

    anybody who believes pharma costs are justified by materials is… well, let’s just call them uninformed. It’s not justified by R&D costs or production issues. It’s justified by the stock market, by the CEO having a race with other pharma CEOs for the biggest bonus, and by no other thing.

    • crusa187@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      The R&D is often publicly funded by research grants, with free labor by grad students. Our tax dollars are paying for extortion over our health in this completely broken system.

      As you pointed out, this is literally just sociopathic CEOs doing what capitalism demands of them.

    • Eatspancakes84@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      Normally you can think of these prices as the reward to taking a risk. The chance of developing a drug and bringing it to market is usually small, and the reward should accordingly be high. However, in the particular case of Ozempic, the company attempted to develop a diabetes drug, and accidentally found that the drug works against obesity. That means that the reward in this case outweighs the risk by an obscene amount.

    • melpomenesclevage@lemm.eeBannedBanned from community
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      How much to get people together to steal the recipe and set up a lab?

      Bet its less than a five year supply, which is probably just a week or two between a group og interested parties!

      • Ragnarok314159@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        There are gray market microlabs that will already make it for 1/3 the cost. Since so many insurance companies deny Ozempic for people who are pre-diabetic (which would keep them from becoming diabetic) and Wegovy for people who are obese and have cholesterol issues (again, can actually help with this) but they are not morbidly obese, people turn to these places.

        Doctors say you need it and will help you, but insurance companies tell you “nah”. Yet for some reason they cover it for the endless amounts of yoga Karens who don’t need it at all.

  • blazera@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    article doesnt present any pressure they are facing. also

    Drug production costs are often shrouded in secrecy with little clarity on how they relate to prices, if at all.

    Prices are never about cost, its what people are willing to pay. Which gets brutally exploited by pharmaceutical industry.

  • bacondragonoverlord@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 years ago

    I honestly don’t get why so many people are so upset.

    I get it with things like insulin where we know how to make it for years. But a new revolutionary drug? Sure their production cost is low but that doesn’t include R&D and just think of how many drugs don’t work. That’s why when we do find something that works we can’t expect it to only pay for itself, it has to make enough buck to basically pay for them as well, because why else even bother?

    • Maggoty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      Most pharma R&D is actually done by the government. Unless they can prove it’s an outlier there…

      • TempermentalAnomaly@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        The government funds the first phase of the search. This is very important. But beyond that, the bill is footed by private sector.

        A quote from this study:

        The federal government is the primary funder of basic research in biomedical sciences through the National Institutes of Health (NIH). This research is essential for informing all medical progress, including the development of therapies. Overall, 54% of basic science milestones are achieved by the public sector and 27% by the private sector. From that point onward, taking the necessary risks associated with the drug development process required to advance basic science research into safe and effective treatments for patients corresponds primarily to the biopharmaceutical industry. Performing Phase I through IV clinical trials consumes more than 90% of total research and development (R&D) cost.

        A number of recent studies indicate that a majority of this R&D is funded by investments made by the private sector.1 In a 2019 report, Research America indicated that, in 2016, the private sector funded 67% of total U.S. medical and health R&D while the federal government supported 22%.

        • Maggoty@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 years ago

          The NIH is not immune to poison pill studies financed by the industry. Research America is the for-profit health industry with a mask on. It was also physically conducted by at least one member of a political think tank that lobbies for government payouts to corporations, (PPI). Then there’s this gem at the end-

          This research was supported by funding from the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA), Amgen Inc., The Biotechnology Innovation Organization (BIO), GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis International AG, Sanofi S.A., and Pfizer Inc.

          Maybe, instead of leaning on opinion pieces written by the industry you should look at actual research done by PHDs.

          Like this direct comparison done for 2010-2019 finding industry breaks even with the government at it’s most forgiving calculation. And at worst the government is shouldering 90 percent of the costs.