Valuy@lemmy.zip to Today I Learned@lemmy.worldEnglish · edit-220 hours agoTIL that cancer drug Revlimid is one of the bestselling products of all time. It cost nearly $1,000 per pill, even though that same pill cost just 25 cents to makewww.propublica.orgexternal-linkmessage-square84fedilinkarrow-up1577arrow-down15file-text
arrow-up1572arrow-down1external-linkTIL that cancer drug Revlimid is one of the bestselling products of all time. It cost nearly $1,000 per pill, even though that same pill cost just 25 cents to makewww.propublica.orgValuy@lemmy.zip to Today I Learned@lemmy.worldEnglish · edit-220 hours agomessage-square84fedilinkfile-text
minus-squareChef@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up208arrow-down1·2 days agoThe pharma industry likes to defend its pricing by saying: The second pill cost 25¢. The first pill cost $800 million. What they never actually say is that the US government (thereby the taxpayers) heavily subsidized most of that cost. Big Pharma could use its own Mario Brother, just saying.
minus-squareWhitebrow@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up49arrow-down2·edit-21 day agoEven if we go by 0 subsidies as an argument, anything past around the 800 thousandth pill sold has already paid for itself and is now pure profit. The argument deserves to burn alongside whoever uses it to extort people for life saving care.
minus-squareWiddershins@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up9·1 day agoI’m on board with Wario flat-out eating the next one.
minus-squareMinnesotaGoddam@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up5·1 day agoI thought waluigi was going to do the wawawewa dance in their faces
minus-squareDefault Username@lemmy.dbzer0.comlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up36·1 day agoAlso most pharma research is done by public universities that private pharma companies then buy the rights to.
minus-squarefruitycoder@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up10arrow-down1·1 day agoThe clinicals tend to be ran by the companies pushing for go to market. Those also cost millions
minus-squareFundMECFS@piefed.ziplinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up4·19 hours agoThey can be. But often they aren’t fully self-funded.
minus-squarea_non_monotonic_function@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1arrow-down1·1 day agoMost? I’m incredulous but I don’t know the actual answer.
minus-squareslazer2au@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up16·1 day agoBrave to assume that only one country gives a subsidy. Australia has the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme that does the same thing.
The pharma industry likes to defend its pricing by saying:
The second pill cost 25¢.
The first pill cost $800 million.
What they never actually say is that the US government (thereby the taxpayers) heavily subsidized most of that cost.
Big Pharma could use its own Mario Brother, just saying.
Even if we go by 0 subsidies as an argument, anything past around the 800 thousandth pill sold has already paid for itself and is now pure profit.
The argument deserves to burn alongside whoever uses it to extort people for life saving care.
I’m on board with Wario flat-out eating the next one.
I thought waluigi was going to do the wawawewa dance in their faces
Waluigi is King
Also most pharma research is done by public universities that private pharma companies then buy the rights to.
Happy cake day.
The clinicals tend to be ran by the companies pushing for go to market. Those also cost millions
They can be. But often they aren’t fully self-funded.
Most? I’m incredulous but I don’t know the actual answer.
Brave to assume that only one country gives a subsidy.
Australia has the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme that does the same thing.
Let’s-a go!