• be_excellent_to_each_other@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      From the passage I already quoted:

      In reality, public sources — especially the NIH — fund the basic research that makes scientific breakthroughs. Then small, boutique biotech and pharmaceutical firms take that publicly generated knowledge and do the final stages of research, like running clinical trials, that get the drugs to market.

      • Quereller@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        That is not true. Small biotech usually cannot effort late stage development. They either just get buyed by big pharma. Or they licence the lead compound to big pharma and get royalties. Very few exemptions to this.

        Edit: the link you provide cites this FT article as a source for this claim. However the article is about M&A and supports my point.

        • be_excellent_to_each_other@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’ll assume you know more about this than I do despite the lack of any citation.

          I refuse to believe there’s an ethically acceptable business justification for this ridiculous markup.

          The entire healthcare industry in the US is built on a foundation of corporate greed. This is just one obvious example.

          • Quereller@lemmy.one
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            At least they loose exclusivity after 15 -20 years and generics are usually much cheaper.