Goldman Sachs asks in biotech Report: Is curing patients a sustainable business? (2018) • Hacker News Board

Re: Goldman Sachs asks in biotech Report: Is curing patients a sustainable business? (2018)

#181

Post by HarryHirsch » Tue, Nov 18, 2025, 12:35 AM UTC

mattmaroon wrote: post #119

KingMob wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure why you're being down-voted. Efficient markets for talent shouldn't tolerate racism/sexism/etc, but all the historical evidence is to contrary. It's almost as if rational _homo economicus_ is a bad foundation.

I don’t think so. It’s not that law firms intentionally passed up on bidding a little more for women because they were as good as men but cheaper. It’s because they thought the women were simply less good. It takes awhile for people to change their view. If you come from a society that has for thousands of years said women couldn’t do jobs like be a lawyer as well as men, it’s not crazy that it would take you 40 year…

It's not a surprise that especially at elite college it's classical economics that is taught in the gen. ed. courses. Its models are simple, and plainly visibly wrong.

If behavioural economics or political economics were taught instead, anything with models that have explanatory power it would be viewed as lefty and revolutionary, and that would really upset donors. Consequently we are stuck with homo oeconomicus.

Re: Goldman Sachs asks in biotech Report: Is curing patients a sustainable business? (2018)

#182

Post by com2kid » Tue, Nov 18, 2025, 2:24 AM UTC

philipkglass wrote: post #175

com2kid wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it is a common trope in futurism circles. Because death is not technically a disease, right now if a company came up with a literal immortality pill they wouldn't be able to get it patented or get FDA approval for it.

It's a common trope but also wrong. If you invent a pill that gives old people the mental and physical vigor of 25 year olds, you don't need to patent or trial it as an immortality pill. Just pick one of the many medical conditions associated with advancing age, like osteoporosis or male pattern baldness, and prove that it safely and effectively treats that condition. If the pill cures baldness and also gives patient…

> Just pick one of the many medical conditions associated with advancing age, like osteoporosis or male pattern baldness,

A drug that maintained telomere length doesn't treat anything directly.

A drug that slows down metabolism and extends life by 20% on average, not patentable.

Re: Goldman Sachs asks in biotech Report: Is curing patients a sustainable business? (2018)

#183

Post by purplepatrick » Tue, Nov 18, 2025, 2:40 AM UTC

It may not be a sustainable business with current business models. But if cures came with a "post-scription" model where the cured patient paid, say, 0.5% - 1% of their income to the drug company in perpetuity, then incentives are aligned. (Of course, administration is a problem here.) As someone with an incurable disease, I would happily pay for a cure in such a way...

Re: Goldman Sachs asks in biotech Report: Is curing patients a sustainable business? (2018)

#184

Post by anonymouskimmer » Tue, Nov 18, 2025, 2:55 AM UTC

com2kid wrote: post #182

philipkglass wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a common trope but also wrong. If you invent a pill that gives old people the mental and physical vigor of 25 year olds, you don't need to patent or trial it as an immortality pill. Just pick one of the many medical conditions associated with advancing age, like osteoporosis or male pattern baldness, and prove that it safely and effectively treats that condition. If the pill cures baldness and also gives patient…

> Just pick one of the many medical conditions associated with advancing age, like osteoporosis or male pattern baldness, A drug that maintained telomere length doesn't treat anything directly. A drug that slows down metabolism and extends life by 20% on average, not patentable.

Why can't you patent a drug that maintains teleomere length? Or one that slows down metabolism? The FDA does not control the patent office, merely what drugs can be sold in the US. And neither of these inventions seem like they would fall under the limited patentability exclusions.

So invent it here, patent it everywhere, and sell it in the countries that allow it to be sold.

Re: Goldman Sachs asks in biotech Report: Is curing patients a sustainable business? (2018)

#185

Post by ninetyninenine » Tue, Nov 18, 2025, 6:10 AM UTC

tptacek wrote: post #180

ninetyninenine wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not. Can you not go around making up fucking shit and baselessly accusing people of posting LLM output? Thanks.

It very obviously is. You went from using normal-person quotation marks to fitted quotes in the span of one message, you have a Unicode multiplication dot, and things like Again, this is not “subjective.” It’s what actually happens This isn’t a subjective opinion. It’s just how discounted cashflow works. You can argue about the ethics if you want. But the financial comparison isn’t ambiguous. Your paste doesn't even…

[flagged]

Re: Goldman Sachs asks in biotech Report: Is curing patients a sustainable business? (2018)

#186

Post by burnt-resistor » Tue, Nov 18, 2025, 9:16 AM UTC

Private equity: hold my beer

This is already happening in the form of privatization and monopolization of hospitals and healthcare services like regional hospitals and life flight air ambulance services putting profits ahead of patient outcomes.

Re: Goldman Sachs asks in biotech Report: Is curing patients a sustainable business? (2018)

#187

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Nov 21, 2025, 12:35 AM UTC

ninetyninenine wrote: post #185

tptacek wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It very obviously is. You went from using normal-person quotation marks to fitted quotes in the span of one message, you have a Unicode multiplication dot, and things like Again, this is not “subjective.” It’s what actually happens This isn’t a subjective opinion. It’s just how discounted cashflow works. You can argue about the ethics if you want. But the financial comparison isn’t ambiguous. Your paste doesn't even…

[flagged]

[deleted]

Re: Goldman Sachs asks in biotech Report: Is curing patients a sustainable business? (2018)

#188

Post by anonymouskimmer » Thu, Nov 27, 2025, 4:40 PM UTC

wodenokoto wrote: post #142

anonymouskimmer wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If a person dies from a disorder in their 20s, they'll never buy your heart medication in their 70s. Today's patient is tomorrow's patient.

That is not the alternative to curing disease that is being proposed. The choice is between healing for good or keep on continued medication. Or more bluntly: sell a product or sell a subscription

The point I was trying to make is that most pharma companies have many products for many disorders and diseases. Curing one of those diseases will make a few life-long patients for some of your non-curing treatments.