• 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.