Re:New antibiotic kills off persistent infections
by Fomite on Thursday November 14, 2013 @03:31PM
(#6735322)
They have gotten involved in lightening the regulatory burden for certain drugs that are orphaned or for rare diseases, which is essentially a subsidy.
Also, the number of drug company booths at a recent infectious disease conference I went to suggests this whole "No interest in drugs that cure in three weeks" thing is...well...not actually true. These are incredibly common infections, there's plenty of market for them. Hell, the compound was initially discovered by Bayer.
Re:New antibiotic kills off persistent infections
by maxerickson on Thursday November 14, 2013 @01:53PM
(#6734524)
I wondered about this and looked it up (leading to my other comment in this thread). NIH has a $30 billion medical research budget. DARPA is a couple of billion. Of course the $30 billion is not all directed at less profitable drugs.
Apparently there are a bunch of hard problems there.
Re:New antibiotic kills off persistent infections
by giarc on Thursday November 14, 2013 @03:53PM
(#6735478)
The government is involved, but through academia. For example in Canada we have the CIHR (Canadian Institutes of Health Research) which would fund develop of drug develop (among many other health research).
You wonder of course why, if that is the case (and I do agree), that the government doesn't get involved with more funding or subsidies for these types of less profitable drugs. The same way they spend countless dollars on other things for the public good (and company profit obviously).