r/news Jan 14 '22 Gold 1 Helpful 19 Wholesome 18 Evil Cackle 3 Silver 19

Shkreli ordered to return $64M, is barred from drug industry

https://apnews.com/article/martin-shkreli-daraprim-profits-fb77aee9ed155f9a74204cfb13fc1130
54.9k Upvotes

View all comments

13.9k

u/Gingorthedestroyer Jan 14 '22 Silver Gold Helpful Take My Energy Starry

Let’s do insulin producers now.

4.1k

u/Colorado1996 Jan 14 '22

Made millions from hiking prices from $13.50 to $750

Damn, saw that line and thought they were talking about insulin. Price gouging has happened on multiple life saving drugs? People are the worst

1.9k

u/[deleted] Jan 14 '22

Insulin should have a co-pay of about $2. Or less.

115

u/TittyMcNippleFondler Jan 14 '22

But how would they make money after all the expenses related to research and development that were funded by grants that were funded by our tax dollars?

221

u/Gingorthedestroyer Jan 14 '22

When inventor Frederick Banting discovered insulin in 1923, he refused to put his name on the patent. He felt it was unethical for a doctor to profit from a discovery that would save lives. Banting’s co-inventors, James Collip and Charles Best, sold the insulin patent to the University of Toronto for a mere $1. They wanted everyone who needed their medication to be able to afford it.

107

u/Lisa-LongBeach Jan 14 '22

Same for Jonas Salk… I believe his response to why not patent his cure for polio was “Would you patent the sun?” A different world and morals today sadly.

38

u/_greyknight_ Jan 14 '22

Would you patent the sun?

Uh, duh!

- Fortune 500 CEO

1

u/Lucky-Variety-7225 Jan 15 '22

Don't steal my idea for NFT water!

19

u/horseydeucey Jan 15 '22

Nestle, would you patent... water?!

49

u/Jonne Jan 14 '22

Yeah, ask a capitalist if they would patent the sun and they'd be on the first rocket to the interplanetary patent office.

3

u/Raptor169 Jan 14 '22

Speaking from memory so correct me if I'm wrong but I remember Salk did try to patent but was rejected because polio vaccine was considered part of nature.

Still doesn't take away from your point though.

4

u/Lisa-LongBeach Jan 15 '22

I’m pretty sure those were his words, but not 100% sure. Back then unrestrained greed wasn’t as acceptable or worshipped as it is today

3

u/Raveynfyre Jan 15 '22

A different world and morals today sadly.

I really wish some things had never changed.

51

u/Discreet_Deviancy Jan 14 '22

THIS! It was never intended to be a for-profit product.

18

u/GreenStrong Jan 14 '22

That insulin is still very cheap; modern versions last longer and enables better regulation of blood sugar. They still shouldn’t cost as much as they do. The researchers who invented them should be rich, but it should not be such a racket for the corporations that produce it.

5

u/IcarusOnReddit Jan 15 '22 edited Jan 15 '22

Researchers don't make the big money, the bloodsucking CEOs do.

1

u/A_giant_dog Jan 15 '22

The people who make the money are investors. C level folks at those companies get kinda rich, the investors get filthy rich

1

u/sousuke Jan 15 '22

Dr. Silverman would beg to differ.

3

u/SirReal14 Jan 15 '22

And that type of insulin is $20 at Walmart. Modern, significantly safer insulin that has been recently invented is what is expensive.

5

u/markh110 Jan 15 '22

You say that like it's a reasonable thing; you can get about a year's supply of modern insulin in Australia for ~$55USD. Americans are being exploited, and I'm so angry on your behalf.

5

u/Red_AtNight Jan 15 '22

It's worth pointing out that Banting's method was to extract insulin from a dog's pancreas. It worked, but it wasn't very efficient. For about 50 years, all commercial insulin came from cows and pigs from slaughterhouses... similar issues to dog pancreas, and because it came from non-human animals, it had a risk of causing allergic reactions. That was the state of things until 1978 when synthetic insulin was first invented.

Basically all of the insulin that humans use nowadays is produced synthetically, through processes that are patented, and are not the process that Banting and Best developed in 1923. They work a hell of a lot better, but that's why insulin is still expensive despite Banting and Best selling their patent.

2

u/ImpossibleEffort4313 Jan 15 '22

He should’ve put his name on it so he could’ve controlled the price for it.

5

u/Nomandate Jan 14 '22

That was for the process of extracting insulin. Modern insulin is synthesized.

47

u/StinzorgaKingOfBees Jan 14 '22

Anything related to healthcare and medicine shouldn't be for profit. Then you are literally putting price tags on lives.

4

u/TheLizardKing89 Jan 14 '22

If there’s not a profit motive, there will be less incentive to invest in new pharmaceuticals. If someone develops a drug that improves the lives of millions of people, they should be able to profit from that. I’m not saying they should be allowed to charge whatever they want, but the idea that any profit is bad is just ridiculous.

17

u/khinzaw Jan 14 '22

Profit motive goes the other way too, companies have chosen not to develop drugs to treat rare diseases because they won't be profitable.

2

u/TheLizardKing89 Jan 14 '22

There isn’t any system in the world in which rare diseases get a ton of research dollars thrown at them.

6

u/horseydeucey Jan 15 '22

There isn't a system in the world in which rare diseases get a ton of research dollars thrown at them.

There's not?

Damn, someone totally should start one up... call it something like the, "Rare Diseases Clinical Research Network".

Oh wait, my bad. There is a system in the world in which... yadda yadda. Oh! And it's a part of the National Institutes of Health?! The largest single public funder of biomedical research in the world?!

But that can't be, you said such a thing doesn't exist.

3

u/TheLizardKing89 Jan 15 '22

The RDCRN has an annual budget of less than $40 million. For comparison, Americans will spend about half a billion dollars ($500 million) on Halloween costumes for their pets this year.

→ More replies

1

u/SeeArizonaBay Jan 15 '22

But but but my capital

→ More replies

1

u/khinzaw Jan 14 '22

There are systems where the government subsidizes the development and production. The US does that to some degree.

2

u/TheLizardKing89 Jan 14 '22

Yes, but which diseases do they subsidize more, rare diseases or diseases that a ton of people suffer from?

→ More replies

1

u/ZarMulix Jan 14 '22

There isn't any country in the world without people dying of hunger. That's not a metric by which to aspire (does it already exist). It's literally anti-innovation.

2

u/GETitOFFmeNOW Jan 15 '22

With a straight face they say "it can cost a million dollars to get a drug researched and approved!"

And that's fine for us rubes who simply have zero concept of what a million dollars means, much less billions in profits.

3

u/Umarill Jan 14 '22

You are literally paying for it with your taxes, they shouldn't make millions out of health issues when you already pay for it.