You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

0
3

[–] auggs 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

While this proposition carries tremendous value for patients and society, it could represent a challenge for genome medicine developers looking for sustained cash flow.

So I think this means that any company that offers gene therapy or sells a one-shot-cure would quickly go out of business. No returning customers. My question is why couldnt current business incorporate research into these sorts of genetic cures? That way each genetic breakthrough only bolsters profit for a short time, rather than going out of business entirely afterwards. Or could our taxes support the development of these one-shot-cures?

0
1

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

Implying some one shot gene correction wouldn’t be worth a ton of money even on a one time basis. Also unless people stop being born you wouldn’t lose a stream of new business.

0
1

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

Research doesn't get funding. R&D spending has been declining for a while now. And recently companies have managed to outsource their R&D: Desperate people do all of the hard work on their own and if they hit upon a remotely successful idea, one of the big companies buys them out. Everyone that doesn't have a hit idea goes bankrupt. It's like socialized R&D, privatized profits. It's far more efficient for the bottom line and it's more optimized for those short-term investors only following quarterly reports.

2
-1

[–] GaydolphNiggler 2 points -1 points (+1|-2) ago 

Because the FDA kills those that do. See archived article below. Contacts I have spoken with in this area said he claimed to have a cure for cancer. http://archive.is/WLLA6

0
0

[–] Doglegwarrior ago 

My friends good friend invested in this weird no profit.. suppodly has cured pretty much everything you can imagine.. take a look for your self.. https://www.truesciencealliance.org