I am perfectly cool with health care being a cost center.
Goldman Sachs questions whether curing patients is a sustainable business model
361–370 of 376 posts
Re: Goldman Sachs questions whether curing patients is a sustainable business model
#362Earlier quoted context omitted.
Where have they been shown to be useless?
responded here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16828451
I find the way that response has been worded to be misleading. Labeling an effectiveness of around 5% as 4/10ths of a percentage demonstrates a desire to mislead the reader.
Most people will shake off a flu infection easily. The elderly or people with other medical problem may not, so I find it a weak argument to say they are useless based on that study.
The second study quoted is pretty much what I would expect based on my knowledge of influenza virus. It evolves quickly, which is why being exposed to it once year doesn't build up your immunity to the evolved strain going around a year later
To say they are useless is just wrong.
Re: Goldman Sachs questions whether curing patients is a sustainable business model
#363Earlier quoted context omitted.
Antivaccers here? I expected better, but I see you have been rightful down voted.
Do you get flu vaccine every year?
Strawman.
I get vaccines for serious diseases when visiting foreign countries. Yellow fever, hepatitis, tetanus amongst others. So far I have manged to avoid becoming autistic.
I am in good health so have no real reason to get a flu shot. (One year my work offered me one and I took it).
Re: Goldman Sachs questions whether curing patients is a sustainable business model
#364Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think nobody suspected getting enough sleep was bunk before we did a study on 1000 people.
1000 years of grandmas passing down oral history is a great source of experiment ideas, but the one about only hiring/funding people that can publish a positive result in a high-impact journal needs to get tested ASAP. Getting rid of the useless cruft lingering around from the past is just as useful as advancing the frontiers of knowledge. When people can stop waving crystals around and dipping their fingers in oil,…
Yes but that's not incompatible. Life is not an all of nothing proposal.
Re: Goldman Sachs questions whether curing patients is a sustainable business model
#365Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you get flu vaccine every year?
Strawman. I get vaccines for serious diseases when visiting foreign countries. Yellow fever, hepatitis, tetanus amongst others. So far I have manged to avoid becoming autistic. I am in good health so have no real reason to get a flu shot. (One year my work offered me one and I took it).
> preventive medicines that does not actually require people to be sick.
> I am in good health so have no real reason to get a flu shot.
Aren't you saying the exact same thing that you called "antivaccer".
CDC doesn't recommed flu to people who are not * in good health* , its a population wide recommendation. You being in good health is not relevant to GP's point of recommending vaccines to people who are not sick( which you seem to agree with).
Re: Goldman Sachs questions whether curing patients is a sustainable business model
#366Earlier quoted context omitted.
>People should be willing to pay as much for it as the alternative Maybe. But maybe there's also something wrong with expecting that much. Somehow Sidney Farber didn't decide that he was going to charge the families of kids with ALL the actuarial value of the remainder of their lives. It can be frustrating to see the public, out of ignorance, grossly misjudge the relative contributions to health of, say, a vaccine de…
> Maybe. But maybe there's also something wrong with expecting that much. Somehow Sidney Farber didn't decide that he was going to charge the families of kids with ALL the actuarial value of the remainder of their lives. The problem is this. Suppose the total value of a cure is two billion dollars but it takes a billion to do the research. You can say they should get, say, 1.2 billion instead of the entire two, but t…
>If it wasn't, why has it taken this long for someone to take ownership of that huge pile of risk-free money
Maybe because no one thought of it before?
The picture you're painting is fine if you're evaluating a handful of candidate molecules each with, you'd guess, a 5% chance of having the right PK profile or something.
But for major breakthroughs, there are "unknown unknowns" that make it impossible to estimate that likelihood. It's nice to think that, if you let the full value be captured, it would incentivize more people to pursue one-in-a-million "lottery ticket" cures, but it just doesn't work that way. They're not lottery tickets if they have incalculable odds.
For the most part, the difference between management and cures is in this latter category. I.e. we don't have a cure because we just don't know how to do it, not because we were too cheap to invest in the biochemical trench warfare to find the right molecule.
Re: Goldman Sachs questions whether curing patients is a sustainable business model
#367if it aint broke, dont fucking fix it. im talking to you "dev dev dev" faggots.
Could you please stop posting unsubstantive comments to Hacker News?
Re: Goldman Sachs questions whether curing patients is a sustainable business model
#368Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem here is not business interests its the IP protections that keep the pressure from being applied by the marketplace. I dont know enough to have an educated opinion on healthcare regulation or on social services...but its disengenuous to claim that medicine cant be managed as a business when its already so heavily regulated that it barely looks like a normal business. I would agree that the current model is…
Great argument. Would you like to buy some ED medication I made by stuffing capsules with Drano? /s
No ones talking about drug approvals...im talking about IP protections after its approved... do you have any idea how corrupt and regulated that side of the business is?
Even generic drug prices are artificially manipulated by the original IP owners.
The amount of monopolistic laws in pharma driven by lobbying, etc are ridiculous...
Re: Goldman Sachs questions whether curing patients is a sustainable business model
#369Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Maybe. But maybe there's also something wrong with expecting that much. Somehow Sidney Farber didn't decide that he was going to charge the families of kids with ALL the actuarial value of the remainder of their lives. The problem is this. Suppose the total value of a cure is two billion dollars but it takes a billion to do the research. You can say they should get, say, 1.2 billion instead of the entire two, but t…
>If it wasn't, why has it taken this long for someone to take ownership of that huge pile of risk-free money Maybe because no one thought of it before? The picture you're painting is fine if you're evaluating a handful of candidate molecules each with, you'd guess, a 5% chance of having the right PK profile or something. But for major breakthroughs, there are "unknown unknowns" that make it impossible to estimate tha…
> They're not lottery tickets if they have incalculable odds.
The odds aren't incalculable. They might have wide error margins, but that's hardly the same thing.
> we don't have a cure because we just don't know how to do it, not because we were too cheap to invest in the biochemical trench warfare to find the right molecule.
You're thinking about this at the wrong level of abstraction. It isn't a matter of having some candidate molecules and we just need some monkeys on typewriters or a huge bank of supercomputers to test them all.
It's that if you want a cure for cancer, you have to pay scientists to look for it. Not knowing where to look is not the same as not knowing how to look. The fact that it's hard is the reason it's expensive.
Re: Goldman Sachs questions whether curing patients is a sustainable business model
#370Earlier quoted context omitted.
As much as I wanted this to be true it doesn’t really stand up to scrutiny. Yes “day to day” access to healthcare is far superior but it’s very week on the high end stuff. Even Castro in his final hours was treated in a Spanish hospital. Ideally we would want some kind of reasonable alternative that exists between these two extremes ...
Correlation != Causation The more likely explanation for Castro seeking treatment in Spain is that Cuba is a relatively small country of only 11 million, and it should be expected that they're not at the very forefront of the world on every area of medical expertise.
My substantial point still stands.