News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Goldman Sachs questions whether curing patients is a sust... by refurb on Friday April 13, 2018 @08:37AM (#16829373)
That's the ideal in a world without any competition from other products.

We don't live in that world so what you describe doesn't actually happen.

We have more cures being developed now than ever before and it's very lucrative for the companies doing it.

Re:Goldman Sachs questions whether curing patients is a sust... by PeterStuer on Friday April 13, 2018 @09:10AM (#16829616)
Well, we certainly have exponentially more consumption of treatments for depression, allergies, obesity, pain, attention disorders, ... . That these are very lucrative for the companies supplying them (under a state-covered monopoly agreement) is also correct. Whether those constitute 'cures' is highly debatable.
Re:Goldman Sachs questions whether curing patients is a sust... by refurb on Friday April 13, 2018 @11:22AM (#16830806)
We now have a cure for HCV, relapsing blood cancers, genetic forms of blindness, blood clotting disorders (in a year or two). I can give you more examples if you have trouble finding them.

And yes, the companies are giving a monopoly on one drug which allows competitors to create others similar to it. And the patent only gives about a decade of monopoly, after which the price drops to ~10% of what it was.