Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Sunday April 15 2018, @06:48AM   Printer-friendly
from the enough-to-make-you-sick dept.

One-shot cures for diseases are not great for business—more specifically, they’re bad for longterm profits—Goldman Sachs analysts noted in an April 10 report for biotech clients, first reported by CNBC.

The investment banks’ report, titled “The Genome Revolution,” asks clients the touchy question: “Is curing patients a sustainable business model?” The answer may be “no,” according to follow-up information provided.

[...] 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... While this proposition carries tremendous value for patients and society, it could represent a challenge for genome medicine developers looking for sustained cash flow.

[...] Ars reached out to Goldman Sachs, which confirmed the content of the report but declined to comment.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 15 2018, @07:28AM (4 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 15 2018, @07:28AM (#667192)

    If you can provide competitive pricing and doctors for Americans who need medical care nowadays. While many are stuck here and unable to afford both travel and health care, there are quite a few others, especially the middle aged to elderly who could certainly afford medical tourism in Europe, including travel expenses, for less than they pay monthly for health care here in the U.S. Most Euro prices are already 1/2 to 1/3 of what similar equipment and procedures are in the US, which means even yearly checkups could often be cheaper in Europe overall for people without US based medical insurance or with limited emergency only medical coverage.

    Food for thought, and a great way to pull one over on the US Government :)

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   +2  
       Interesting=1, Informative=1, Total=2
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 1) by Ethanol-fueled on Sunday April 15 2018, @02:32PM (1 child)

    by Ethanol-fueled (2792) on Sunday April 15 2018, @02:32PM (#667273) Homepage

    There's also Mexico, if you don't mind risking waking up from the surgery with somebody else's leg grafted to your head.

    • (Score: 2, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 15 2018, @06:11PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 15 2018, @06:11PM (#667341)

      That'd be an IQ boost for some americans I could think of.

  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by frojack on Sunday April 15 2018, @08:16PM (1 child)

    by frojack (1554) on Sunday April 15 2018, @08:16PM (#667373) Journal

    This is not about medical tourism or "its cheaper in Europe". You've TOTALLY missed the point.

    Its about the cost of development and production of a drug that most people never need and a small percentage will need ONCE in their life.

    Just because your government taxes the hell out of you and then gives you "free health care" doesn't solve this problem.
    Pharma companies, big or small, won't want to spend the research money or maintain production lines for once-in-a-lifetime drugs.

    You will have to find another funding model, or set up another government operation to buy up the patents, and manufacture these drugs, (or fund the developers or third parties to do so).

    Look this is not the Red Car Line [99percentinvisible.org] conspiracy all over again. Its not a conspiracy at all.

    Its just economics 101. You have to cover your costs. Even in socialist economies or purely communist ones, if something does not pay for itself somebody else has to pay for it somehow, or the producers will just walk away and become farmers or janitors. When that happens it won't be available in that heaven on earth called Europe either.

    --
    No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
    • (Score: 4, Informative) by PartTimeZombie on Sunday April 15 2018, @09:38PM

      by PartTimeZombie (4827) on Sunday April 15 2018, @09:38PM (#667393)

      Its about the cost of development and production of a drug...

      No, no it's not. [sciencebasedmedicine.org] It's about profits. [npr.org]

      It looks like the drug companies are OK with lying about their costs to justify the prices they charge.