USA buys up world stock of remdesivir • Hacker News Board

Re: USA buys up world stock of remdesivir

#61

Post by credit_guy » Wed, Jul 01, 2020, 2:12 PM UTC

walls wrote: post #27

ketzu wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is that supposed to make someone angry? Because this seems like an okay solution to make back investments and still allow cheaper access for poorer nations. Still if they can't keep up with demand and there are many lifes at stake, we should probably legislate a compensated invalidation of such a patent.

> Because this seems like an okay solution to make back investments The investment was made by the American people paying taxes. The profits will be privatized. https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/05/26/remdesivi...

Based on your link, various American government agencies contributed $70MM to the R&D of remdesivir. While I can't find the total R&D cost for this particular drug, the average R&D cost for bringing a new drug to market is about $1BN [1]. Draw your own conclusions.

[1] https://www.biopharmadive.com/news/new-drug-cost-research-de...

Re: USA buys up world stock of remdesivir

#62

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Jul 01, 2020, 2:12 PM UTC

bmmayer1 wrote: post #56

ianleeclark wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just because it is doesn't mean it ought to be. This, in fact, seems to be a pretty clear indication of why alternative funding methods should be considered.

Alternative funding methods already exist. Nothing is stopping governments or nonprofits from funding or developing new drugs. So what's your proposal here?

[deleted]

Re: USA buys up world stock of remdesivir

#63

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Jul 01, 2020, 2:13 PM UTC

throwaway_pdp09 wrote: post #37

bearjaws wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This, I work in specialty pharmacies and Remdesivir is a complicated drug to produce. Currently Gilead believe they can bring down their production time from 8-12 months 6-8 months, that means we won't see a large supply of this drug until 2021.

I have a noobish question. Looking at Remdesivir wiki page to try to get a feeling for why it's hard to make, their are some really odd chemicals used like this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trimethylsilyl_triflate Why is something like this, with its silicon and sulphur atoms as part of the backbone, needed? Why wouldn't the same but with a more typical fully-carbon backbone work? If it's too complex a question, ski…

[deleted]

Re: USA buys up world stock of remdesivir

#64

Post by x86_64Ubuntu » Wed, Jul 01, 2020, 2:13 PM UTC

tryptophan wrote: post #60

x86_64Ubuntu wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Remdesivir was developed with public funds. Shouldn't the fact that the public shouldered the risk of development be factored into any of this? https://www.uab.edu/news/health/item/11082-investigational-c...

Technically true, but completely misrepresents the issue. Discovering (100s of)compounds in a lab (which is what the public funds pay for) is the easy and much cheaper part. Testing it in humans and modifying it for that purpose is hard, expensive, and time consuming. Pretending like these drug companies do nothing and just take all the benefit from public research is incorrect.

I never said they did nothing. I'm pointing out that they aren't the John Galt story that people are lead to believe when people mention "recouping cost". And like any other shareholder, shouldn't we see something of a benefit for putting up our own capital?

Re: USA buys up world stock of remdesivir

#65

Post by BurningFrog » Wed, Jul 01, 2020, 2:14 PM UTC

newsbinator wrote: post #52

whymauri wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fortunately, it's possible millions will not die in this case because remdisivir is most likely a quality-of-life therapeutic for people in the recovery phase. Your intuition is real though and my existential terror is that a real viral entry treatment will be developed, and that it may become unavailable or means-tested in an exclusionary way.

Imagine going about your life like a normal person into your 40's or 50's, then one day deciding as the CEO of a company that you'd rather millions of people die than let your investors down or let your company go out of business. I suppose there are fiduciary duty ramifications too that will potentially ruin your life, but still... one day you're a moral, law-abiding person, the next you're a mass murderer (by abste…

How do you imagine millions of people will die again?

I plan to disagree, but first I need to know what the hell you're trying to say.

Re: USA buys up world stock of remdesivir

#66

Post by rayiner » Wed, Jul 01, 2020, 2:15 PM UTC

walls wrote: post #27

ketzu wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is that supposed to make someone angry? Because this seems like an okay solution to make back investments and still allow cheaper access for poorer nations. Still if they can't keep up with demand and there are many lifes at stake, we should probably legislate a compensated invalidation of such a patent.

> Because this seems like an okay solution to make back investments The investment was made by the American people paying taxes. The profits will be privatized. https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/05/26/remdesivi...

Pandemic aside, the US government shouldn’t get a better deal than any other investor. If you invest “tens of millions” into drugs that will cost “billions” to bring to market, you don’t get to get the drug for free. Imagine a Silicon Valley investor proposing those terms: we’ll invest $1 million in your startup for 75% of the equity. But that’s exactly what people are proposing when they say a few tens of millions of government funding should buy free access to patented technology that takes hundreds of millions to bring to market.

Re: USA buys up world stock of remdesivir

#67

Post by raphlinus » Wed, Jul 01, 2020, 2:17 PM UTC

paulcole wrote: post #17

somurzakov wrote: post #16

1. remdesivir is not a cure for COVID and not as valuable to the rest of the world. We need vaccine 2. there is plenty of generic remdesivir in India

Until recently people were buying it from India to treat FIV (a previously fatal disease in housecats). There was a whole network of people supplying it through Facebook groups and mailing it to the US.

To fill in slightly more detail, that's GS-441524 instead of remdesivir. It's closely related but a lot easier to manufacture. Here's a good article on that:

https://www.statnews.com/2020/05/14/gilead-should-ditch-remd...

And a fascinating tale how cat owners are buying the black market version to treat FIP:

https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2020/05/remdesiv...

Re: USA buys up world stock of remdesivir

#68

Post by BurningFrog » Wed, Jul 01, 2020, 2:17 PM UTC

sitkack wrote: post #34

bmmayer1 wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That said, patent restrictions are arguably the only reason the drug exists in the first place. So let's not get out over our skis here.

That said arguably that there are many kinds of methods for funding the creation of drugs. The existing system isn't the only way. Your statement is literally, "stick with the status quo". The NIH should fund and produce these drugs, no patents, free for all to produce.

Creating drugs is usually not the big cost. Regulatory compliance is.

Reforming the FDA process could save an large amount of lives and money.

Re: USA buys up world stock of remdesivir

#69

Post by perseusprime11 » Wed, Jul 01, 2020, 2:17 PM UTC

Consultant32452 wrote: post #59

kstenerud wrote: post #2

"The drug, which was invented for Ebola but failed to work, is under patent to Gilead, which means no other company in wealthy countries can make it." Sorry, but if the one blessed company with the patent can't keep up with demand, and millions are going to die because there are patent restrictions, then ignore the patent laws and save some lives. It wouldn't look too good if the American government tried to stop it,…

The last studies I saw showed Remdesivir didn't actually save lives. Unless some very different studies have come out, this is just a politically connected pharma company using the pandemic to get a fat check from the US government. This is just your standard every day corruption.

They use some medical mumbo jumbo to show that patients spend less time at hospitals compared to other drugs and therefore Remdesivir works. They know how to lobby the scientific community so we will never know the truth. Sick patients will use and pay out of fear. I would love to see an unbiased study at some point if at all that shows the relative efficacy of Hydroxychloroquine with and without zinc and Remdesivir and other drugs.

Re: USA buys up world stock of remdesivir

#70

Post by pmontra » Wed, Jul 01, 2020, 2:20 PM UTC

According to the article 500,000 doses are the production of July, and 90% of August and September. Three full months would be 500,000 / 2.80 * 3 = 535,714 doses. A full treatment is made of six doses. There are 89,285 treatments in there. Less than 30,000 per month. Too bad for the rest of the world that all of them will happen in the USA but they are way too few to matter globally. Split them proportionally with the population and how many of them are going to be assigned to any European country? Maybe we need a x10 in the production or more. Better, local production, which I understand is neither quick nor easy.