• LaLuzDelSol@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    17
    ·
    1 day ago

    I figured this would come up but you’ve gotta remember that drugs are expensive as hell to develop. And it just received US approval in June so it’s not like they have been sitting on this making money for years.

    • SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      28
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      The cost of drug development is vastly overstated as an excuse. The reality is $100-200M, but pharma expects $14B++ in returns. Little of that goes back into basic research.

      The front end of costs was spent by the NIH, and after that was ended, Pharma is not taking up the slack. It’s not sustainable and pharma will die in a decade.

      • Dozzi92@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        Yeah, a lot of these drug companies have ad budgets larger than the R&D budget, but any overhead is used to jack up the prices. I swear ads are sold at inflated prices for the sake of being able to sell high.

      • Gladaed@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 day ago

        Just because development of a single drug costs not that much does not mean you don’t need to pay for failed drugs too. If many drugs die during trials someone gotta pay for that. Profitability is a better indicator for greed.

      • LaLuzDelSol@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        I’d like to see some sources on those numbers, I couldn’t find any of that when I searched.