Government To Start Research Center To Help Develop New Medicines

New York Times:

The Obama administration has become so concerned about the slowing pace of new drugs coming out of the pharmaceutical industry that officials have decided to start a billion-dollar government drug development center to help create medicines.

Read the whole story: New York Times

Comments

[cabot]

01:45 PM on 01/24/2011

Great but as usual, private pharmaceuticals will make all the incredible profits from our tax dollars at work and then when we complain about the outrageous prices, the pharmaceuticals say that they spend so much on research, which inspite of, they still end up with billions in profits! great work american politicians, you all are really doing a great mis-service to us, the tax payers, the voters, the people.

[Conk]

10:31 AM on 01/24/2011

A billion dollars for new drugs? This country is now insane. Drugs do not and can not work in concert with nature and the human body, period! The pharmaceutical paradigm is a complete failure by any measure.

How about a billion for research to prove (not that it isn't already proven) that herbs, spices, and whole foods CURE dis-ease, something drugs simply cannot do.

[theseusofaustralia]

01:01 PM on 01/24/2011

you dont have a medical degree, stop pretending you do.

[FrenchKissed]

08:49 PM on 01/24/2011

If there was an herb, spice or whole food that showed any potential as a cure cancer (or some other disease/disability) the pharmaceutical companies would jump on the opportunity to patent it, and invest billions of dollars to get it on the market. But they aren't going to throw billions of dollars away developing something that has shown no promise.

[Lynne Parker]

08:48 AM on 01/24/2011

Some of us prefer to seek health through alternative therapies. The government is working hand in hand with corporations to squash herbal medicines, natural foods, etc.

This administration has totally sold out to corporations. I thought Bush was bad. Obama makes him look like a schoolboy. There is no line between government and corporation any longer.

[theseusofaustralia]

01:02 PM on 01/24/2011

Lynne herbal medecines arent tested for efficacy like drugs are.

[Prateek Panchal]

01:11 AM on 01/24/2011

In a lot of other countries the government negotiates drug prices for ALL it's citizens and they get the drugs for many times less than in the USA. Why are we not DEMANDING the same here or are we just all stupid.

Thanks for sharing.

http://www.healthyskinguide.net

[Marcus L Wells]

08:19 PM on 01/23/2011

Investing a billion dollars in developing better drug therapies is a great idea, but before it is done there are some things that we ought to demand of the oversight of pharmaceutical companies. It seems in the last decade the cost of drug production has sky rocketed so that consumers are having difficulty affording newer therapies. There have been any number of side effects that increase the morbidity and mortality in the healthcare system which needs to be reduced. Conflicts of interests of private drug companies inducing public sector approval boards to get their drug approved has become an issue, but also so has the accuracy of peer reviewed journalism . The under-utiliation of the NIHs complementary and alternative medicine department is an area where organic and natural products could be studied. The cost of growing "green therapies" could sharply reduce that of large laboratory set ups. Perhaps more collaboration by the NIH with homeopathic, naturopathic,, herbal and Ayurvedic could bridge the gap. As these things are done we should explore looking into newer drugs with less side effects that are cost effective otherwise the economic burden to the healthcare system continues to rise.We should also consider preventive methods with more and more pharmaceutical companies producing vitamins, enzymes, minerals, and antioxidants. Perhaps these bionutrients will also prove to be more cost effective by helping consumers maintain their health through prevention. A billion dollars in all these areas could manage costs, reduce morbidity and improve over all health.

[hobo62]

08:07 PM on 01/23/2011

And I suppose we will get a new drug for colon cleansing and then turn it over to big pharma so they can rake us over the coals for seven years with the profits.

[lcr999]

07:36 PM on 01/23/2011

In general, a good step. But "inventing" drugs is just a small part of the cost and time to bring it to market. Clinical trials can take 10years and a billion dollars, AFTER it has been invented. Not to mention the ones that bomb out of clinical trials after spending 100s of millions.

The issue with the entire pharmaceutical establishment is that there is no money to be made in curing or preventing disease. The money is in managing your condition, with a pill (or 2 or 3) a day for the rest of your life. Why cure the cause of your high blood pressure, when they can sell you a pill a day for the rest of your life. That is one reason there are few new antibiotics. Why sell a new drug that you only have to take for 10 days, when it cost the same about of $ and time to develop another high blood pressure, or depression, or arthritis medication that you have to take for the rest of your life.

Not to mention that it is "uneconomical" to develop/market cures or even management medicine for less common diseases.

[cable1977]

11:20 AM on 01/24/2011

"That is one reason there are few new antibiotic s"

Really? How do you know that? Why is it a monetary issue and not the difficulty in designing new classes of antibiotics? There is a great deal of research going on trying to design new antibiotics.

"Why cure the cause of your high blood pressure, when they can sell you a pill a day for the rest of your life."

How do you cure high blood pressure. If, as you seem to imply, that the cure is easy to develop, then surely you must already have some idea of what must be done? Is the etiology of all high blood pressure the same? If not, then how do you develop a single cure?

Many, but not all, patients with high blood pressure could reduce it by following the guidance of their doctor and altering their diet. However, many people find it much easier to take a pill than to make lifestyle changes. Pills are easy, lifetstyle changes are hard.

[lcr999]

02:07 PM on 01/24/2011

I didnt say they were easy or hard to develop. Just that there is more money in managing disease than in curing it.

[theseusofaustralia]

01:05 PM on 01/24/2011

because corporations care about short term profits, they dont think that far in the future, so if they find a cure, that will make them billions that financial year, they will sell it.

[multidoc]

06:46 PM on 01/23/2011

Haven't we heard that without excessive profits, the medical industries would have no motivation to make new advances? Guess what... no new advances anyway.

[mc53]

06:23 PM on 01/23/2011

Consolidation by big pharma has led to this malaise in drug development. Whenever a big company gets bigger innovation dies. Drug companies are milking profits and don't want to spend on R+D.

[southdakotajack]

06:45 PM on 01/23/2011

R&D expenses to develop new drugs dramatically cut into the advertising budget. And, that leads to reduced sales and reduced profits.

[theseusofaustralia]

01:07 PM on 01/24/2011

there is alot of research, so much so that pharma and many journals cant keep up. the problem is the development part.

[PARepublican]

06:17 PM on 01/23/2011

If the government is going to follow though with this, they shoud extend the patents of meds to 50 years.

[mc53]

06:22 PM on 01/23/2011

Why? Your tax dollars will fund this and you want to give big Pharma license for 50 years. Spoken like a thoughtless Republican.

[carmemirandashat]

06:32 PM on 01/23/2011

There is no rationale for your silly pronouncement. Are you suggesting that the government hold the patent? Are you suggesting that the patent be transferred to private industry, even though no intellectual property was developed by the company? Are you suggesting that government maintain ownership of the rights to the drugs and simply license it's manufacture? Or are you interested only in making simplistic inaccurate, bumper sticker pronouncements?

[mc53]

06:45 PM on 01/23/2011

Bumper sticker GOPer. No real ideas.

[Djin]

06:08 PM on 01/23/2011

Government+Drugs= not good
This is the same organization that brought you Anthrax and nerve gas I would rather see Universities get grants to develop new medicines

[theseusofaustralia]

01:08 PM on 01/24/2011

it's the same thing.

[Sean 6399]

05:51 PM on 01/23/2011

It's right there in the Constitution, right between freedom of speech, and freedom of assembly:

"And the Federal government shall research and provide free of cost to the people, ever improved methods of treating erectile dysfunction."

[timhere]

05:51 PM on 01/23/2011

So the tax payers pay to create the drugs then they are given away to the drug companies to make billions on.

[multidoc]

06:43 PM on 01/23/2011

Exactly. .

[lcr999]

07:01 PM on 01/23/2011

You left out the part where the drug company spends billions of dollars on testing, manufacturing scale up, and marketing. The "invention" of drugs is cheap. There are thousands or even tens of thousands of "promising" drugs developed each year. A very few of them will make it through the rest of the process to market, after about 10 years and a billion dollar investment.

[october2009]

05:40 PM on 01/23/2011

YES! Instead of trying to prevent disease through improved diet and exercise, the politicians are going to borrow $1 Billion from China to make little pills that have dangerous side effects and that just mask over the problem.

Great...

[theseusofaustralia]

01:09 PM on 01/24/2011

not all diseases are caused by diet.

[Patroclus]

05:25 PM on 01/23/2011

The pharmaceutical companies are not addressing the questions needed to address many diseases. There is no hope of them addressing needed drugs for diseases that afflict only a small ( say in the thousands) number of people. Any government responsible for the health and welfare of its citizens should remedy this situation. It has always been agreed that an appropriate role for government research is to address problems that are not sufficiently profitable or too expensive for corporations to pursue. In this case, the need is all the greater. However, what worries me is that this is only a mechanism for coporations to have taxpayers pay for the research they should be doing. This is what has happened to fundamental science. The missions of the federal agencies that fund research have turned largely to applied rather than fundamental research and taxpayers are, essentially, paying for the research needed by corporations. This may be the same scenario. The taxpayer will pay for all the drug research and then the government will give it away to the corporations who will then charge their usual exorbitant prices. But this is the new American corporatocracy where the government is but a handmaiden to the corporatocracy/plutocracy. It will be no surprise that the exploitation of the middle class will continue.

[Sean 6399]

05:47 PM on 01/23/2011

Government is not responsible for the health and welfare of its citizens. Government is responsible for law and order. The rest is up to you.

[carmemirandashat]

06:26 PM on 01/23/2011

Wrong. The government, as charged in the Preamble to the Constitution, to "promote the general Welfare,..."

[Patroclus]

07:26 PM on 01/23/2011

Or indeed as stated in the Declaration of Independence....."....to institute a new Government...to effect Safety and Happiness...

But one cannot expect Social Darwinians to appreciate civilization but only have the most primitive tribal aspects of human society as their ideal. It is clear that those nations that care for the health of their citizens are nations that have not only the happiest citizens but also are among the most prosperous and educated. But facts and logic have little sway with the me, me, me, me crowd.