Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Gutting of America's Medical Research

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 98 posts

Re: The Gutting of America's Medical Research

#31

Post by throwawaymaths »

lentoutcry wrote: post #29
throwawaymaths wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

this sounds like it's a really bad idea for the government to fund. What's to stop someone who happens to have made it in the ivory tower go crazy, spin up some kooky ideas that are highly risky and just blow taxpayer money on something not really accountable?

researchers don’t receive unlimited funding for life, even if they made it into a permanent position. they have to regularly apply for grants, and those applications are reviewed by experts and have to be grounded properly in previous work. it’s just that potential for profit is not a criterion for evaluation, as it is in the private sector

[flagged]

Re: The Gutting of America's Medical Research

#32

Post by biophysboy »

notyourav wrote: post #5

A naive question: So much “tax payer” money is going towards research funding. But it looks like private companies are reaping rewards, mostly as a new drug. Why is this research not (mainly) privately funded?

To give a more financial answer, it’s because pharma products have a low probability of success and have long lag times. That means a high cost of capital: lenders and investors are going to expect good returns to make up for the risk.

Second, biotech/pharma actually already do invest quite a lot in R&D. But they tend to focus on translational work rather than speculative exploration, because it is less risky.

Re: The Gutting of America's Medical Research

#33

Post by jmuguy »

throwawaymaths wrote: post #22
lentoutcry wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

a lot of basic research is very risky and most of the time it’s not stuff that leads to immediate development of a new drug. it’s basically acquiring knowledge with the hope that some of it might turn out to be practically useful in the future, but in the short term, it just allows us to understand stuff. but it’s not directly profitable, so private companies aren’t motivated to invest so much money in that

this sounds like it's a really bad idea for the government to fund. What's to stop someone who happens to have made it in the ivory tower go crazy, spin up some kooky ideas that are highly risky and just blow taxpayer money on something not really accountable?

And yet the grant writing process continues, as the perfect shouldn't be the enemy of the good. I'm glad someone at the DoD thought that ARPANET was a good idea to research so that 60 years later we can argue online about whether the govt is just giving out tax payer money to whoever for any reason.

Re: The Gutting of America's Medical Research

#34

Post by mystraline »

bediger4000 wrote: post #3
lentoutcry wrote: post #2

it's so surreal to me how this is happening under our eyes and nobody's stopping it. the impact this will have on our health is so staggering. and what's worse, even if these cuts were reversed tomorrow, it would still take quite some time to reverse the negative effects

There will be follow-on effects, too. Like "wellness" ending up on the same tier as "medicine". Without the research, who's to say? This will also compound the Qanon fascination with "medical freedom", where the patient gets to dictate to the doctor what to do (i.e. use ivermectin against COVID, or whatever other superstition rises to the top of the Qanon imagination cauldron).

> This will also compound the Qanon fascination with "medical freedom", where the patient gets to dictate to the doctor what to do (i.e. use ivermectin against COVID, or whatever other superstition rises to the top of the Qanon imagination cauldron).

That's very double-edged.

The open question is should humans have the right to take substances individually?

Sure, you get Ivermectin/covid deniers. But you also get homemade Solvaldi (cure for Hepatitis C). I can make it for $300 for the 12 week course, and it retail costs $84000

Of course, even making and taking this drug you manufacture is illegal, even aside patent bullshit.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42538903

But why shouldn't I be able to treat myself? Why do we accept really shitty gatekeepers (medical establishment, doctors) gatekeep treatments and cures from us?

And more currently, now that der fuhrer quit the emergency use allocation for Covid shots, now you need a doctors scrip for 'allowing to get a vaccine'. I should be able to get this if I pay for it. But nope, now need to pay for needless doctor payment and more barriers.

So at least in that side, I'm on Qanon's view that I should be able to personally treat myself with whatever substance I deem. Of course, I'll definitely heed a doctor's suggestion as an expert. But fuck.. My body, my choice.

Re: The Gutting of America's Medical Research

#35

Post by [deleted] »

throwawaymaths wrote: post #30
whatshisface wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Private and public philanthropy both contribute to science in the same way. If you're asking why private philanthropists can't replace federal funding, it's the same as the reason why we can't just make billionaires pay all the tax: the NSF budget would bankrupt Bill Gates in 13 years. More realistically, what would happen would be that rather than sacrificing themselves for the greater good in some kind of voluntari…

Stop doing expensive science? Some things can just wait for tech to catch up and make science easier by lowering costs. An example is the superconducting supercollider. Chemistry and pharma industry were making NMRs cheaper and the cost of the supercollider components went down. So the LHC was a much more effective "buy" than the SSC.

[deleted]

Re: The Gutting of America's Medical Research

#36

Post by biophysboy »

throwawaymaths wrote: post #22
lentoutcry wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

a lot of basic research is very risky and most of the time it’s not stuff that leads to immediate development of a new drug. it’s basically acquiring knowledge with the hope that some of it might turn out to be practically useful in the future, but in the short term, it just allows us to understand stuff. but it’s not directly profitable, so private companies aren’t motivated to invest so much money in that

this sounds like it's a really bad idea for the government to fund. What's to stop someone who happens to have made it in the ivory tower go crazy, spin up some kooky ideas that are highly risky and just blow taxpayer money on something not really accountable?

I understand your reasoning, but our efforts to prevent this is part of why professors spend so much time writing grants and filling out other paperwork these days. It’s better in my opinion to just accept reasonable risk.

I would add that weird ideas can be surprisingly useful; nobody expected research on gila monsters to lead to our most successful weight loss treatment to date.

Re: The Gutting of America's Medical Research

#37

Post by NoMoreNicksLeft »

aeblyve wrote: post #17
notyourav wrote: post #5

A naive question: So much “tax payer” money is going towards research funding. But it looks like private companies are reaping rewards, mostly as a new drug. Why is this research not (mainly) privately funded?

In part because the expiry of patents puts a cap on the return on investment private research can get you. Patents last for about 25 years, but important innovations have returns far into the future, hundreds of years. At that rate, you would very often be better off accumulating interest on capital anyways. Notwithstanding the nature of scientific progress as an accumulation of smaller experiences (each individually…

Even ignoring the limits of patents, how much of this research "pays off"? Do 1% of research grants go towards something tangibly useful, or is it closer to 0.1%?

Re: The Gutting of America's Medical Research

#38

Post by ARandumGuy »

throwawaymaths wrote: post #22
lentoutcry wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

a lot of basic research is very risky and most of the time it’s not stuff that leads to immediate development of a new drug. it’s basically acquiring knowledge with the hope that some of it might turn out to be practically useful in the future, but in the short term, it just allows us to understand stuff. but it’s not directly profitable, so private companies aren’t motivated to invest so much money in that

this sounds like it's a really bad idea for the government to fund. What's to stop someone who happens to have made it in the ivory tower go crazy, spin up some kooky ideas that are highly risky and just blow taxpayer money on something not really accountable?

Most research is funded through grants. Many different federal agencies provide grants, as well as private organizations. When applying for a grant, you have to indicate what you're going to spend the money on. And your grant may be rejected if the organization funding the grant thinks you're not going to spend the money well. And if you can't find someone to give you a grant, you probably can't do the research, even if you have tenure.

There are problems with this system. Researchers often have to spend a lot of time writing grant applications, and grants can be rejected for any number of bad reasons. And there are cases where research was funded that probably shouldn't have been funded. But research funding isn't given willy-nilly to whoever asks, and taxpayers wasting money on kooky ideas isn't a particularly big problem.

Re: The Gutting of America's Medical Research

#39

Post by [deleted] »

lapcat wrote: post #14
kelseyfrog wrote: post #6

The positive side seems to be that relinquishing our position[1] as the medical research country should lower healthcare prices. For decades we've been told that our healthcare prices were due to medical research - drug discovery, device innovation, &etc. By destroying our ability to do research, we should expect to see healthcare prices equalize at a price where those costs are no longer factored in, right? 1. By wa…

> For decades we've been told that our healthcare prices were due to medical research That was a lie to justify insurance price gouging.

[deleted]

Re: The Gutting of America's Medical Research

#40

Post by biophysboy »

throwawaymaths wrote: post #31
lentoutcry wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

researchers don’t receive unlimited funding for life, even if they made it into a permanent position. they have to regularly apply for grants, and those applications are reviewed by experts and have to be grounded properly in previous work. it’s just that potential for profit is not a criterion for evaluation, as it is in the private sector

[flagged]

I've worked and still work in science, and his description of grant proposals and research focus is correct.
Post reply on HN