Re: Nah
In response to point 2, from one of my previous posts (http://forums.theregister.co.uk/forum/1/2014/11/28/beyond_the_genome_youve_been_decoded_again/):
do drugs cost that much to develop? We don't have much evidence - you can read between the lines here:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21256615
Here's where the old $800million/new drug figure comes from:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12606142 (please note it is entirely from figures from the pharmaceutical industry, not publicly available info)
The $800 million was debunked at book length: http://books.google.co.nz/books?id=SKr5BDAmiMoC&printsec=frontcover&dq=the+$800+million+pill&hl=en&sa=X&ei=WLx6VJjyHoLRmwW73YLYDg&ved=0CBMQ6AEwAA
And recently(ish): "one can conclude that R&D costs companies a median of $43.4 million per new drug" from BioSocieties (2011) http://www.pharmamyths.net/files/Biosocieties_2011_Myths_of_High_Drug_Research_Costs.pdf
Apologies for long quote, but bluntly the people who made the original claim (and now amplify it every so often) about the high cost of developing drugs are those who ask for money to pay for the development of drugs. Can you see a conflict of interest?
Biting the hand that feeds IT
