• oakey66@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    31
    ·
    6 months ago

    If we were a reasonable country, we’d have a research arm of the FDA that was employing scientists/chemists to develop drugs for the most basic health needs of its citizens and dispensing them at cost to keep drugs affordable but developing cures versus disease maintenance drugs. It was something that Elizabeth Warren proposed in 2016 that was absolutely the right thing to run on.

    https://www.yahoo.com/news/chinese-scientists-cure-diabetes-using-205304771.html

    But we live in a hellish American landscape where our government does absolutely the bare minimum amount of support for those in need. And does so begrudgingly.

    • homura1650@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      6 months ago

      For vaccines, we shouldn’t even be dispensing them at cost. Vaccinations are the second most cost effective public health intervention ever, beaten only by clean drinking water.

      In purely financial terms, the cost of vaccinations are lower than the average cost to the US tax payer of someone getting sick. The public service of people not getting sick is a nice bonus. As is reducing the chances of this becoming another Covid style economic catastrophe (plus, again, the public service of protecting your citizens)

    • rottingleaf@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      If between two variants in a decision there’s a huge difference in incomes for someone, that someone will find a way to make the deciding party interested in that difference.

      Which is why good guys should introduce good things slowly and carefully, the way bad guys introduce bad things (unless they are too powerful to care).

    • RBG@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      I am not sure you are aware of the immense costs to develop new drugs for diseases. At least that’s what your comment sounds like, making new drugs. To do that as a state entity is completely unrealistic as it would take a massive investment from the government. Most drugs developed also fail at some stage of the process, meaning you lost all that money and work on it.

      Now, if you meant that the government should produce already established basic drugs that are known to work, sell those at cost, yes, that would be a very sensible approach.

      • arglebargle@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        6 months ago

        The US spent 31.6 billion to develop, produce and purchase covid 19 mrna vaccines.

        So the US is already spending a ton of money…

        • RBG@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          Yeah, how many different vaccines was that? Now multiply by however many different diseases you want to cure and take into account that some diseases require medicines to be tested in very lengthy clinical trials.

          That is still a huge step up from the 31.6 billion you quote.

          • arglebargle@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            I am not sure it needs to be if the foundation is Mrna vaccines. At least that’s the idea anyway.

            I was just pointing out how much the government spent and, it was quite a lot.

            • RBG@discuss.tchncs.de
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              6 months ago

              Yeah I get what you are saying, you are not wrong. But I have replied to a different person who said this specifically:

              we’d have a research arm of the FDA that was employing scientists/chemists to develop drugs for the most basic health needs of its citizens and dispensing them at cost to keep drugs affordable but developing cures versus disease maintenance drugs

              That is not just vaccines for me. All vaccines are drugs but not all drugs are vaccines.

              And that is surely way to much to handle for the government. There isn’t even a single large pharma company that does all that.

    • Verito@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      And does so begrudgingly.

      Totally willing to help the very needy…pharma bros get a piece of that sweet, sweet government pie. Why let government do anything when outsourcing to private capital helps me buy my yach…er…feed my kids.

  • RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    6 months ago

    And then Moderna will charge the citizens for it via insurance or out of pocket.

    Love being double-charged, don’t you? Your tax money and then your paycheck.

  • Sonicdemon86@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    6 months ago

    Better idea let’s not feed cows any type of poop. Bird flu is coming from feeding cows bird droppings for protein. Let’s find some other way to give them protein.

  • Fedizen@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    200 million is a pittance today. Vaccines are generally more effective than pills outside of antibiotics. But more importantly the USDA should be requiring more animal vaccinations and there should be more investment in vaccinating livestock if we’re going to continue to eat mammals and birds