The Four Thieves Vinegar Collective • Hacker News Board

Re: The Four Thieves Vinegar Collective

#111

Post by darawk » Sat, Jul 28, 2018, 6:44 AM UTC

tzs wrote: post #51

darawk wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Someone has to buy the lab equipment and pay the scientists. If you think their profit is 'exorbitant', then you should be investing in pharma. But historically and as a whole, they generate returns comparable to the rest of industry.

For all but one of the specific drugs mentioned in the article, the lab equipment and scientists were paid for a long long time ago. One is a common hormone produced in the human body that was isolated over 120 years ago and has been used for medicinal purposes almost as long. Another was discovered in 1952 and has been used in medicine since 1953. Another was patented in 1961 and approved by the FDA in 1971. The two…

You make a good point here. I think the article should have discussed this a bit, I made the assumption that they were cavalierly trying to copy drugs currently under patent. If that is not the case, I mostly retract my criticism of them. Thanks for pointing this out.

Re: The Four Thieves Vinegar Collective

#112

Post by jgtrosh » Sat, Jul 28, 2018, 7:06 AM UTC

shub wrote: post #104

daveFNbuck wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's pretty irresponsible to throw a handful of pills with nasty side effects into a crowd.

Why, on the off chance one flies into someone’s open mouth and the surprise triggers a swallowing reflex? I wouldn’t have a lot of sympathy for an adult who ate the homemade pills a guy threw at him and then suffered serious side effects.

What easy-to-reckon category do you assign the vast swathes of youths who might occasionally be easily convinced to take or buy drugs from strangers in the street?

Re: The Four Thieves Vinegar Collective

#113

Post by endymi0n » Sat, Jul 28, 2018, 7:37 AM UTC

darawk wrote: post #109

Hasz wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Eh, it's not as simple. From what it looks like, they're not just copying syntheses from the patent application. With this Chematica data, it seems like they were pursuing novel syntheses for a variety of drugs in order to minimize side product formation or make the synthesis easier, which is an impressive feat. That being said, they aren't running clinical trials or evaluating drug efficacy, which is another difficu…

You're right, they are doing something a bit novel, which is cool from a technical/hacker perspective. But clinical trials and efficacy aren't just 'another difficult part', they are the difficult part. Synthesis routes are an after-thought to any serious pharmaceutical company.

It‘s interesting to see how negative the comments are here, compared to the civil disobedience of SciHub — in fact it‘s much of the same thing.

And while there is an argument to be made about how developing new medicine costs real money, the re-investment of profits into research is around 10%, we‘re talking about a deeply corrupt industry here. And while it‘s definitely still morally questionable to clone new drugs, the case is much more clear cut for substances like epinepherine or insulin, for which the patents have long expired. If pharma corporations keep these meds at insane prices with dirty tricks like biosimilars or application patents (the equivalent of „doing X on a computer“ software patents), that‘s at least as immoral. I for one welcome these hackers for some fresh air in the market.

Re: The Four Thieves Vinegar Collective

#114

Post by thx11389793 » Sat, Jul 28, 2018, 8:32 AM UTC

peteretep wrote: post #87

> These precursors are controlled by the federal government ... they’d make medicine from poison [by using the street drugs to get back to the precursors] cf: “A Simple and Convenient Synthesis of Pseudophedrine from N-Methylamphetamine” https://heterodoxy.cc/meowdocs/pseudo/pseudosynth.pdf

is this actually a legit synthesis? as a non-chemist it has the air of plausibility, author names and quips aside.

Re: The Four Thieves Vinegar Collective

#115

Post by VvR-Ox » Sat, Jul 28, 2018, 8:42 AM UTC

klipt wrote: post #17

darawk wrote: post #12

> Indeed, Laufer and his collaborators can’t stop pissing off powerful people because Four Thieves is living proof that effective medicines can be developed on a budget outside of institutional channels. Synthesized. Not developed. Synthesizing medicines is easy. Developing them is extremely difficult.

I can "render" a movie onto my harddrive from bittorrent in minutes. I don't know why Pixar has to spend so much time on their rendering! /s

Sorry but that is not a valid comparison.

Movies are for fun & profit.

Medicine is for people's health / survival and profit.

You can live without the first but without the second you'll probably die soon and maybe painful as well (depending on the first fatal desease you contract).

Re: The Four Thieves Vinegar Collective

#116

Post by tomcooks » Sat, Jul 28, 2018, 10:44 AM UTC

monochromatic wrote: post #9

> After a few minutes of gloating about pharma bro Martin Shkreli “rotting at Fort Dix” for raising the price of Daraprim Except that’s totally unrelated to why he’s in prison.

How else would they spam their Shkreli interview done when he was hip

Re: The Four Thieves Vinegar Collective

#117

Post by imbruglia2 » Sat, Jul 28, 2018, 11:46 AM UTC

mplewis wrote: post #72

imbruglia wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hate to be negative. But I have seen enough of these sort of initiative over the years to be skeptical. In reality it seldom makes sense to do it yourself. Few things in general needs to be built or invented. If they do chances are they aren't the ones to do it. It almost always makes more sense acquire the capability to do what you want somewhere else. But as soon as you do that all the edgy rhetoric and potential…

Providing access to otherwise-inaccessible drugs is a real problem. The fact that normal people can accomplish this through an anarchist collective is incredible and should be lauded.

I made an argument that it isn't practical, but people will still prefer the fantasy. And you are saying that "it should be lauded" without addressing any of my concerns. Doing the exact same thing I said people would do. I would be easier just to admit that you care about as much as bankers going to charity dinners.

There is no need for an anarchist collective. You can just go to a third world country an import the drugs. Or you can start a pharma company. Or you can buy proper equipment and hire experienced people. The only reason for doing it yourself, and go to hacker conferences be applauded by people with no knowledge of the subject whatsoever, is to live a fantasy that can't exist if it is effective. And there is no way to loose because ignorant people will always say you did what you could in the face of Goliath even though anyone who was competent knew what would happen.

It is all fake. Just look at every other diy initiative to date that hasn't affected big companies in the slightest. "Hackers" are still perfectly happy about their "successes" while they make six figure salaries helping the oligopoly. Because there is always a new hacker conference, online forum or meetup you can visit to feel good about yourself by excluding people who know better.

These opinions can only exist in a place where the popularity of ignorance is favored over reason. And you'll deserve each other.

Re: The Four Thieves Vinegar Collective

#118

Post by mabbo » Sat, Jul 28, 2018, 12:59 PM UTC

dmix wrote: post #97

mabbo wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You have to be able to do whatever you want to your body and to think the way you want. The problem with most libertarian ideas like this is externalities. If you take something made incorrectly and become incredibly sick, society has to either take care of you or let you die- and no one wants to let people just die. So instead, society foots the bill for taking care of you. I'm not saying these guys aren't fightin…

Ultimately, either way it will create a new competition which will push the hand of the legal market to adapt to being undercut. In that sense it's not simply just the individual benefiting at expense of the wider society but potentially the catalyst which benefits the whole market (even non-black market buyers). There is no reason why Epipens cost $300 other than the fact the FDA has a huge backlog [1] and other reg…

> you could blame the black market, but the simpler solution would be to fix the original problem which caused the black market to exist

Tell that to 100 years of American drug policies.

Re: The Four Thieves Vinegar Collective

#119

Post by drawnwren » Sat, Jul 28, 2018, 12:59 PM UTC

VvR-Ox wrote: post #115

klipt wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can "render" a movie onto my harddrive from bittorrent in minutes. I don't know why Pixar has to spend so much time on their rendering! /s

Sorry but that is not a valid comparison. Movies are for fun & profit. Medicine is for people's health / survival and profit. You can live without the first but without the second you'll probably die soon and maybe painful as well (depending on the first fatal desease you contract).

Equally, my personal utility gained from new innovations in the pharmaceutical space is much higher than the entertainment space. As long as the pharmaceutical industry doesn't go the way of the post-piracy entertainment industry, this is great. I don't think anyone is arguing that big pharma is perfect, but I do enjoy the fact that a lot of money goes into finding new drugs.

Re: The Four Thieves Vinegar Collective

#120

Post by ceejayoz » Sat, Jul 28, 2018, 1:33 PM UTC

refurb wrote: post #95

ceejayoz wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Such "patient assistance programs" are common, and they're designed to further maximize profits at the expense of heightened insurance premiums over time.

What? Giving away free drugs causes insurance premiums to rise? How does that work?

> What? Giving away free drugs causes insurance premiums to rise? How does that work?

So, as an example, I'm on Stelara. It's $10,000/shot.

Their patient assistance program will, without any consideration to income, pay up to $20,000/year of my copays/deductibles.

Why? Because the marginal cost to them of producing the shot is probably $10, so by paying (for example) someone's $4k deductible (or even $13k, if I'm a family on a Bronze plan) they make the remaining $36k that year off insurance. That person might picked a cheaper option or not have taken the shots at all if they'd had to pay the $4k out-of-pocket.

It feels awesome as a patient, but that's because I'm insulated from the enormous cost. Over time, though, it's pushing my premiums up, but in a way that's totally disconnected (from my perspective as the patient) to the pharma benefit I'm getting.