Trying to be observant and not cynical here, but it appears the incentives of the medical system are not always aligned with curing cancer. In the current system, pharma won't funnel it unless there's billions in payoff, while medical oncology, imaging, and radiation are making out like bandits in the current system. How many ads a week do you encounter for "cancer treatment centers"?
We're left with government and charity funding for research, which are both minuscule compared to the above.
This makes no sense. Whoever invents a cure for cancer will have the market cornered and make a ton of money. Drug companies have tremendous incentives to do that. This isn’t a theoretical economic point. It’s exactly what’s happening with Hep C.
Not only that, but someone living past 30 is probably going to need a bunch more health treatments in life. Sure you can milk the dying cancer patient one time a lot, but that’s that then. A cancer survivor is coming back to pay more money to live even longer later.
> 2) Pharmas don't want a cure. They want a daily dose for 40 years like Rogaine. That's how they make money.
Why did they invent Hep C cure then? Sofosbuvir was invented in 2007, and approved in the US for 2013. It cures Hepatitis C, which previously required regular doses of drugs. Why did Pharmasset decide to look for a cure instead of regular daily doses? Why did Gilead buy Pharmasset for $11B? Please, explain how it fits into your economic model of healthcare.
assuming the cure isn't open-source/ otherwise impossible to patent and is basically garage-fab easy. ~84K for a course of hep C meds? insulin costing ~6k per patient per year? i see an incredible incentive to provide a more cost-effective treatment yes, but also see that drug companies have incredible incentives to suppress research they cannot control.
Could we treat it like the lottery? Put $x into a fund each year that grows to ridiculous levels for unambiguous cures for cancer(s) along the lines of the recent cure for Hepatitis C.
On March 27, 2019 the Powerball prize was up to $750 million. People were going out of their mind buying Powerball tickets. A system like this would:
1) Make rewards commensurate with difficulty
2) Allow companies to recoup all or part of their R&D investment before even selling their cure
We get a lot of research projects that feel like they’re testing out new breakthrough theories, to find some consequence of a pathway that has never been seen before.
This one is at least trying to explain anomalous results that have already been reported. I’m not sure if that will end better but at least seems like a better place to start.
