• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    26
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    Fuck off with the big pharma apologetics.

    Boo hoo the corporation got millions in taxpayer money to develop a vaccine and now they have to profit off of it. I feel so bad for them.

    This is subtle astroturfing.

    • just another dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      329 months ago

      By that same logic: it costs a couple of cents to burn a dvd or to transfer a few gigabytes, yet games costs $60.

      All the commenter above you is saying is don’t mix up the cost to develop with the cost to mass produce,

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        49 months ago

        …and the video game industry makes more money than any other entertainment industry. Yes, these things should cost more than just their production cost, but there is currently an obscene amount of money being made by the people at the top of these industries - y’know, the ones whose main role in making and distributing the product is just already being obscenely wealthy. And while I don’t really care if AAA games are overpriced if they’re only $60, I do care if life-saving meds are being held for ransom.

        Do y’all need reminded that insulin, a life-or-death drug that’s been around since the fucking 1920s, only costs at most $10 to make but currently retails for up to $300 a vial? It does not fucking matter whether or not this particular treatment should cost $13 or $90, the markup on any life saving drug being over 1,000% is blatant price gauging at the expense of human life, and the fact that the pharmaceutical industry does this all the time is common fucking knowledge. Anything approaching a defense of this shit either is in fact astroturfing or is so braindead as to call it a necessity that a publicly traded company demand the sick either choose debt or the grave.

      • be_excellent_to_each_other
        link
        fedilink
        39 months ago

        All the commenter above you is saying is don’t mix up the cost to develop with the cost to mass produce,

        That cost to develop was likely not borne by Pfizer in the first place.

        https://jacobin.com/2023/09/big-pharma-research-and-development-new-drugs-buybacks-biden-medicare-negotiation

        Last year, the three largest US-listed pharmaceutical companies by revenues, Pfizer, Johnson & Johnson, and Merck, spent a combined $39.6 billion on R&D. That is, admittedly, a lot of money. But less than Medicare is currently paying on just ten drugs

        While Big Pharma holds vast portfolios of existing patents for prescription drugs, the innovation pipeline for new drugs actually has very little to do with Big Pharma. 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. The share of small companies in the supply of new drugs is huge, and it’s still growing. Fully two-thirds of new drugs now come from these small companies, up from one-third twenty years ago. It is not the research labs of Pfizer that are developing new drugs.

    • RBG
      link
      fedilink
      English
      99 months ago

      Guess this comment of mine will also get deleted but here goes nothing.

      The article is about antiviral medicine, not a vaccine. So you are getting angry at the wrong thing.