[–] UnknownCitizen 1 point -1 points (+0|-1) ago 

“A significant reason is government regulation.”

I call bullshit. We all know medications are priced at the highest possible point a consumer will pay before the number of people declining treatment harms overall profits. If you think you’re ever going to get a “good deal” on a life-saving drug from and immortal profit driven corporation, then you’re gunna have a bad time.

[–] daskapitalist [S] ago 

The FDA takes years to approve treatments, which is a major source of costs, particularly for rare medical conditions.

[–] UnknownCitizen 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

Thanks, I read the article, which along with your comment, provided no substantive analysis or critical thought on the matter beyond, “Regulation is bad.”

Even the source documents used to support the article are derivative and lack substantive critical thought. From the 5-Billion $ figure:

“Taking failures into account, the costs could be as much as $5 billion each. Merck estimates that 75% of its R&D is spent on failures. Only 5 percent to 10 percent of drugs that reach clinical trials get FDA approval. Only 30 percent of those are commercial successes.”

That is a highly compounded constructed string of numbers seeming meant to communicate what? Creating Gene Therapies is hard and expensive? Well, yeah, duh. These companies are trying to create treatments for a system (the human body) they don’t fully understand, by rewriting is operating instructions, which they don’t fully understand. Changes, mind you, which can permanently disrupt the rest of human evolution. An industry that has, in living memory, infected health populations of humans in other countries (to skirt regulator oversight) with diseases, to test their medication, isn’t one that should be trusted to complain about regulations.