Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
“The potential to deliver ‘one shot cures’ is one of the most attractive aspects of gene therapy, genetically-engineered cell therapy and gene editing. However, such treatments offer a very different outlook with regard to recurring revenue versus chronic therapies,” analyst Salveen Richter wrote in the note to clients Tuesday. “While this proposition carries tremendous value for patients and society, it could represent a challenge for genome medicine developers looking for sustained cash flow.”
The money is in managing illness over the lifespan, NOT curing or healing. Keeping people sick enough so that they don't die, yet unwell enough that they need constant care.
From the same article:
Richter cited Gilead Sciences’ treatments for hepatitis C, which achieved cure rates of more than 90 percent.
The company’s U.S. sales for these hepatitis C treatments peaked at $12.5 billion in 2015, but have been falling ever since. Goldman estimates the U.S. sales for these treatments will be less than $4 billion this year, according to a table in the report.
“GILD is a case in point, where the success of its hepatitis C franchise has gradually exhausted the available pool of treatable patients,” the analyst wrote. “In the case of infectious diseases such as hepatitis C, curing existing patients also decreases the number of carriers able to transmit the virus to new patients, thus the incident pool also declines … Where an incident pool remains stable (eg, in cancer) the potential for a cure poses less risk to the sustainability of a franchise.”
This one isnt difficult at all to figure out. Medical companies and big pharma are in business to make money...they are not in it to create solutions, they are in it to create a loyal base of dependent customers. A patient cured is a patient lost forever.
It's a huge game that has been going on for decades.
There was talking about "curing" the common cold when I was a kid.
And forget that "run for cancer cures". Cancer is mega business.
My sister counted on mega $1000's in drugs to slow down the MS she is challenged with, she is
totally worse and has so declined.
It's NOT in the Industry's best interests to CURE AND HEAL. They have to answer to stockholders, major pharma companies....
Keep developing drugs to keep more bandaids going, keep patients coming back.
And Keep THEM all employed.
A game they play and MOST fall for it.
Pharma Industry isn't the only game in town, but a huge one.
Lunacy- So, in your mind, the purpose the medical field is to keep people sick to make more profits?
PS- there is no current cure for MS. However, the best way to insure that there never will be a cure is to stop researching new drugs/techniques to treat diseases such as MS.
Would you prefer a reversion to the middle ages with bleeding and cathartics to "cure" disease?
From a physician " Yes, a scientists, we want to be rigid. But, me, as a physician, I want to find what's best for a patient. Who am I to say that's hogwash"?
Last edited by Nanny Goat; 10-10-2019 at 09:07 AM..
Sorry about your sister and I understand your bitterness but sometimes medications work and sometimes they do not. Many of us watched this in people we cared about. It's a real world. Trial and error and sometimes huge wins...and for millions of people. It's no "pharma". It's the way we learn. Harsh but that's the way it is.
I can tell you as a doc that curing someone, making someone well again is a great personal goal and reward. Same with researchers. Health and disease maintenance can also be rewarding, but all of this is better than medical relapses, deterioration or death. Especially for the younger of us.
Sure there is big money in all of it. What is more precious than good health or life itself?
“The potential to deliver ‘one shot cures’ is one of the most attractive aspects of gene therapy, genetically-engineered cell therapy and gene editing. However, such treatments offer a very different outlook with regard to recurring revenue versus chronic therapies,” analyst Salveen Richter wrote in the note to clients Tuesday. “While this proposition carries tremendous value for patients and society, it could represent a challenge for genome medicine developers looking for sustained cash flow.”
The money is in managing illness over the lifespan, NOT curing or healing. Keeping people sick enough so that they don't die, yet unwell enough that they need constant care.
There are millions of us out there looking for cures. Millions of us want to help patients in the best way, and that is a cure. There will be plenty of lucrative work, fame and fortune in doing so.
Richter cited Gilead Sciences’ treatments for hepatitis C, which achieved cure rates of more than 90 percent.
The company’s U.S. sales for these hepatitis C treatments peaked at $12.5 billion in 2015, but have been falling ever since. Goldman estimates the U.S. sales for these treatments will be less than $4 billion this year, according to a table in the report.
“GILD is a case in point, where the success of its hepatitis C franchise has gradually exhausted the available pool of treatable patients,” the analyst wrote. “In the case of infectious diseases such as hepatitis C, curing existing patients also decreases the number of carriers able to transmit the virus to new patients, thus the incident pool also declines … Where an incident pool remains stable (eg, in cancer) the potential for a cure poses less risk to the sustainability of a franchise.”
Cure = no patients = no profit
You are leaving out the immense value of and to those cured and their families.
It's a huge game that has been going on for decades.
There was talking about "curing" the common cold when I was a kid.
And forget that "run for cancer cures". Cancer is mega business.
My sister counted on mega $1000's in drugs to slow down the MS she is challenged with, she is
totally worse and has so declined.
It's NOT in the Industry's best interests to CURE AND HEAL. They have to answer to stockholders, major pharma companies....
Keep developing drugs to keep more bandaids going, keep patients coming back.
And Keep THEM all employed.
A game they play and MOST fall for it.
Pharma Industry isn't the only game in town, but a huge one.
Let's say you're right. Then that would mean that an alternative would be needed that's not focused on profit, but rather the health of the civilian. Who do you think should take that role, since the issue is private enterprise?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
