--- Ronn!Blankenship <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > A cynic would reply by bringing up the piece on IIRC > this past Sunday's _60 > Minutes_ (or a similar show within the past few > days. Maybe it was a > weekend edition of _Today_.) about the rea$on why > there are no new > antibiotics currently under development to treat > illnesses caused by > bacteria which have become resistant to most if not > all of the available > antibiotics, including in some cases vancomycin, > which until rather > recently was considered the "antibiotic of last > resort" to be used when all > others failed.
Didn't see it - but the next time 60 Minutes gets something right about the pharmaceutical industry will be the first time, so I doubt it would have impressed me...
As I said, I can't recall for sure if it was 60 Minutes or some other show, but the point made by the representative of the industry they interviewed was that it costs close to $1 billion and takes 10 to 15 years to develop *any* new drug intended for use on humans (most of that cost and time being due to (1) the false starts when a particular compound does not pan out and they have to start over with a new one and (2) the complex and lengthy process of getting a new drug approved by the FDA for use by humans), so from a business standpoint of maximizing ROI for the stockholders it is not as attractive to invest that amount of money and time in hopes of ending up with a new antibiotic which when available the average patient who needs it will need to take it for only a week or two until the infection is cleared up as opposed to developing a drug for reducing cholesterol, lowering blood pressure, or managing depression (or enhancing sexual performance) which most patients will have to take every day for the rest of their (hopefully prolonged by the drug) lives . . . and any pharmaceutical company CEO who decides to invest that time and money on a drug (such as an antibiotic) to cure a temporary condition rather than a drug to manage a chronic condition would find him(or her-)self voted out by the company's stockholders and replaced by someone who would make the right business decision. One solution discussed in the piece was whether government should mandate that some of the profits from the sales of drugs for the management of chronic conditions be re-invested in research to develop new antibiotics or presumably other drugs for which there is a need although they are not likely to become cash cows for the companies who develop them, or perhaps come up with some other incentive for them to develop such drugs.
Germs 'R' Us Maru
-- Ronn! :)
_______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
