Genetically modified virus targets cancer cells, creates learned immunity

#26
#26
VolStrom said:
I'd say whatever it takes to recoup their development costs in the first 3 years on the market.
The most expensive drug for medicare is Eliquis at over $7 Billion a year. From what I've read, it cost $3 Billion to develop. Do you think they should recover more than double in one year than it cost to develop? I don't.
ETA: And this is just for medicare recipients, not the rest of the country and world.
Click to expand...

A couple answers:

1) if a company is just allowed to recoup their investment; particularly such large investments then they are not incentivized to develop. Might as well take that $3 billion and put it in some interest bearing account.
2) there are ongoing costs (production, distribution, marketing, compliance and other regulatory) so development costs are just the investment to get to a revenue earning product (same as for any other company).
3) the payer is typically insurers and the Value Proposition for them is "do the costs of including this drug in our formulary reduce our total costs per patient with 'x' condition)". It is cost of this vs cost of other options
4) various regulations result in different payers (eg. Medicare) paying different amounts - not sure what the company should do about that.
5) the (likely) patent protection probably has an effective life of about 8 years (20 years total but 12 years used in pre-revenue development). After that time generics are possible and the price will drop IF companies decide to enter the market. If companies don't enter the market it probably tells you this isn't a lucrative as you make it sound.

So I don't see any way or entity that should be setting "fair" price caps. The market is already highly distorted by a myriad of complex and often conflicting regulations. I have no way of even guessing what the price "should" be.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols
#27
#27
volinbham said:
A couple answers:

1) if a company is just allowed to recoup their investment; particularly such large investments then they are not incentivized to develop. Might as well take that $3 billion and put it in some interest bearing account.
2) there are ongoing costs (production, distribution, marketing, compliance and other regulatory) so development costs are just the investment to get to a revenue earning product (same as for any other company).
3) the payer is typically insurers and the Value Proposition for them is "do the costs of including this drug in our formulary reduce our total costs per patient with 'x' condition)". It is cost of this vs cost of other options
4) various regulations result in different payers (eg. Medicare) paying different amounts - not sure what the company should do about that.
5) the (likely) patent protection probably has an effective life of about 8 years (20 years total but 12 years used in pre-revenue development). After that time generics are possible and the price will drop IF companies decide to enter the market. If companies don't enter the market it probably tells you this isn't a lucrative as you make it sound.

So I don't see any way or entity that should be setting "fair" price caps. The market is already highly distorted by a myriad of complex and often conflicting regulations. I have no way of even guessing what the price "should" be.
Click to expand...

You make good points, and I don't know how to price a drug to be fairly priced for everyone. My problem with drug prices is that drug companies don't price drugs equally across countries with the same economic wealth. The US by far pays more for drugs than Canada or European countries do.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols, AM64 and AshG
#28
#28
VolStrom said:
You make good points, and I don't know how to price a drug to be fairly priced for everyone. My problem with drug prices is that drug companies don't price drugs equally across countries with the same economic wealth. The US by far pays more for drugs than Canada or European countries do.
Click to expand...

I'd suggest this problem is more a result of our HC system and the regulatory regime than Pharma just deciding to stick it to the US
 
#29
#29
VolStrom said:
You make good points, and I don't know how to price a drug to be fairly priced for everyone. My problem with drug prices is that drug companies don't price drugs equally across countries with the same economic wealth. The US by far pays more for drugs than Canada or European countries do.
Click to expand...

This is where I was going with my late stage capitalism remark.

I have no problem with drug companies making a profit, compensating researchers in a manner that attracts the best and brightest, etc. But when the US market has to pay 5-10x the rest of the world for the same drug? Ouch. And that's even without insurance and buying through a wholesaler.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64 and VolStrom
#30
#30
What could possibly go wrong?

iu
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols, AM64, volinbham and 1 other person
#33
#33
MurphyVol said:
Didn't you read what I posted? I asked you to clarify prevent or cure.
Click to expand...
What difference would it make?

MurphyVol said:
So "most" people that get diagnosed can be cured by taking the buns off their Whopper.
Click to expand...
Bread/wheat/cereals, sugar, starches. You want to ridicule and laugh all you want by just minimizing it down to just buns on Whoppers.

MurphyVol said:
Dr. Rasputin, you might want to share that info with the whole wide world
Click to expand...
What I'm saying is likely already widely known, but it goes against the mainstream line of thinking. We've already seen what they did with COVID when you go against the narrative. They will do like you just did in your response... ridicule and calling it misinformation/disinformation.
 
#34
#34
Rasputin_Vol said:
What difference would it make?


Bread/wheat/cereals, sugar, starches. You want to ridicule and laugh all you want by just minimizing it down to just buns on Whoppers.


What I'm saying is likely already widely known, but it goes against the mainstream line of thinking. We've already seen what they did with COVID when you go against the narrative. They will do like you just did in your response... ridicule and calling it misinformation/disinformation.
Click to expand...
Would still really like to see outcome comparisons between herbi, omni, and carnivores.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#36
#36
McDad said:
Would still really like to see outcome comparisons between herbi, omni, and carnivores.
Click to expand...
Do you really think you will get any reliable data based on what we have seen so far with COVID? I don't know myself, but I do see interesting anecdotal evidence that we are promoting high carbo diet which can be a cause of various health issues. But high carb diets are what is promoted by the FDA.
 
#37
#37
Rasputin_Vol said:
Do you really think you will get any reliable data based on what we have seen so far with COVID? I don't know myself, but I do see interesting anecdotal evidence that we are promoting high carbo diet which can be a cause of various health issues. But high carb diets are what is promoted by the FDA.
Click to expand...

Look into the history of why. You're onto something.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols and AM64
#39
#39
Rasputin_Vol said:
What difference would it make?


Bread/wheat/cereals, sugar, starches. You want to ridicule and laugh all you want by just minimizing it down to just buns on Whoppers.


What I'm saying is likely already widely known, but it goes against the mainstream line of thinking. We've already seen what they did with COVID when you go against the narrative. They will do like you just did in your response... ridicule and calling it misinformation/disinformation.
Click to expand...
A trial on mice and small trial on humans that came to several conclusions that all included the word "may" is not what I'd call widely known.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#40
#40
The American diet is hella screwed up. We eat more processed foods than any other country. We have more buffets per capita, especially in the south. We use chemicals as additives that the rest of the world ditched decades ago.

The Mediterranean diet that mixes meats and grains with fresh vegetables and good red wine seems to be the healthiest overall diet we know of.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#41
#41
MurphyVol said:
A trial on mice and small trial on humans that came to several conclusions that all included the word "may" is not what I'd call widely known.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure what study on mice or humans you are referring to. I'm speaking in a general sense. You are not likely to get any widely embraced data to support a low carb diet.
 
#42
#42
AshG said:
The American diet is hella screwed up. We eat more processed foods than any other country. We have more buffets per capita, especially in the south. We use chemicals as additives that the rest of the world ditched decades ago.

The Mediterranean diet that mixes meats and grains with fresh vegetables and good red wine seems to be the healthiest overall diet we know of.
Click to expand...
I'm not so sure about the grains. We already have mainstream acceptance of the effects caused by gluten, but I think it will be another hurdle to get mainstream acceptance of the effects of grains. And alcohol of any kind is not good for the liver. I say this knowing that I still occasionally have my JD. If you want the benefits of red wine, it is likely better to just eat a moderate amount of grapes instead.
 
#44
#44
McDad said:
The premise behind I Am Legend.

I am cynical a true cancer cure will ever make it to market. Too many rely on the curse for their livelihood.
Click to expand...

Oh, yeah. It would be foolish to actually cure a disease when you can milk if for all it's worth with maintenance drugs and continuing medical treatment.
 
#45
#45
McDad said:
The premise behind I Am Legend.

I am cynical a true cancer cure will ever make it to market. Too many rely on the curse for their livelihood.
Click to expand...

You know Martin Shkreli just got out of jail. There are many more like him ... just smarter when it comes to not drawing attention.
 
#46
#46
AM64 said:
Oh, yeah. It would be foolish to actually cure a disease when you can milk if for all it's worth with maintenance drugs and continuing medical treatment.
Click to expand...

There is a submarket for pharma for the medical side effects of the original prescription.

ADHD could be cured with cutting out Mountain Dews.

With TV commercials, only thing advertised these days.

#BigToeThrobs condition
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#47
#47
volinbham said:
I'm not nearly as cynical as this. Cancer isn't one thing. There likely can never be "a" cure since it isn't one situation.

We've actually made incredible progress at effectively curing some types of cancers in some conditions.
Click to expand...

Seems like the later concepts have been around targeting a "vessel" (virus generally) that can attach or breach certain cells. You would guess that's why researchers are supposedly interested in converting a virus for which humans have no natural immunity, but as OrangeTsar says "What could possibly go wrong?" On one hand gain of function research in the right hands might have a very important function, but in other hands it might cause a pandemic. The question is can any Dr Frankenstein be trusted to screw around with Mother Nature?
 
#48
#48
Rasputin_Vol said:
Do you really think you will get any reliable data based on what we have seen so far with COVID? I don't know myself, but I do see interesting anecdotal evidence that we are promoting high carbo diet which can be a cause of various health issues. But high carb diets are what is promoted by the FDA.
Click to expand...
I agree the food pyramid is poor advice. I also think the government is not a reliable source for healthful recommendations because of the political angle. Your ideas have a receptive ear with me.
But....
It is one thing to acknowledge those issues and another thing entirely to claim cancer rates are linked to that advice. Furthermore, it should be relatively easy to confirm your anecdotes through comparisons in humans or other mammals.

The balance of skepticism and conspiracy is a lost art.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols, AshG and AM64
#49
#49
Rasputin_Vol said:
Do you really think you will get any reliable data based on what we have seen so far with COVID? I don't know myself, but I do see interesting anecdotal evidence that we are promoting high carbo diet which can be a cause of various health issues. But high carb diets are what is promoted by the FDA.
Click to expand...

It seems like we took a health dive when the government cut off real sugar and went to corn syrup, too. I've noticed a huge difference in airshow crowds pre and post 1970s. The sugar transition wasn't the only thing that's happened, but it was a major one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols, AshG and 825VOL
#50
#50
AshG said:
The American diet is hella screwed up. We eat more processed foods than any other country. We have more buffets per capita, especially in the south. We use chemicals as additives that the rest of the world ditched decades ago.

The Mediterranean diet that mixes meats and grains with fresh vegetables and good red wine seems to be the healthiest overall diet we know of.
Click to expand...

Anybody remember Euell Gibbons and his famous commercial for healthy eating? He died in his mid 60s.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top