The only problem I see is that I think the pharmaceutical industry has little interest in curing chronic diseases. They prefer to treat them...
•
33
•
@Daniel1212 then the pharmaceutical industry would have to buy the patents at a very, very, very high price and let them disappear into a drawer.
That's my thought on the matter.
That's my thought on the matter.
••
@Artiskon And it should never come out. Who knows how many times that has happened 😅
••
@Daniel1212 The pharmaceutical industry is interested in anything that makes them money. If you are the company that treats chronic diseases, you will make a fortune and because everyone thinks so, everyone will develop the corresponding products. In addition, there are always new patients regardless of the fact that you cure them. Politically, it would also be difficult to justify withholding something like this. And if the big companies really don't want it, there will be start-ups that will do it. So I'm relatively confident. And Fujifilm will benefit anyway, no matter whose drug it is, because they will produce the biologics for everyone. That's just the TSMC approach.
••
@PikaPika0105 I am basically convinced too. I even think that I will reallocate and invest. I think this sector and Japan as a country are easier on the nerves than Hims or Novo with their battles over patents
My two years of investing have already taught me that much.
But apart from that, I believe in nothing as much as human greed. And I absolutely believe that corporations are more interested in chronically ill patients than in cured patients. Lifelong subscriptions, so to speak. Cure Parkinson's? Cure Alzheimer's? Cure cancer? We'd rather do the thing with the pills and radiation...
What are a few billion for patents that are left in a drawer or start-ups that are swallowed up?
My two years of investing have already taught me that much.
But apart from that, I believe in nothing as much as human greed. And I absolutely believe that corporations are more interested in chronically ill patients than in cured patients. Lifelong subscriptions, so to speak. Cure Parkinson's? Cure Alzheimer's? Cure cancer? We'd rather do the thing with the pills and radiation...
What are a few billion for patents that are left in a drawer or start-ups that are swallowed up?
•
11
•@Daniel1212 That is of course a very cynical view of the world. I don't think it's automatic that as soon as you work in a large corporation, you shed your humanity.
•
11
•Not as soon as you start there, of course. But as soon as you get into positions in which you participate in sales to a not inconsiderable extent. From an economic point of view, it simply doesn't make sense for the pharmaceutical giants to cure diabetes or Parkinson's or other chronic conditions. It's simply not worth it. And greed takes precedence over ethics. It's almost naive not to believe that.
•
11
•@Daniel1212 I really think this is a conspiracy theory that is based solely on personal prejudices and cannot be substantiated. It also deliberately ignores the economic benefits for companies. The companies that will be able to cure chronic conditions in the future will make billions from them, which is a huge financial incentive to develop and commercialize such therapies. The risk of someone else beating them to the punch and taking away their business is too high to do nothing, which is why all the big pharma companies are pushing these novel products instead of hiding them. This is no secret either. I think this image of the entrepreneur is toxic beyond all measure and it doesn't help us as a society to demonize the business elite in this way. Just as Blackrock does not want to control the world from the shadows, the pharmaceutical giants do not want to keep us all sick forever.
•
11
•@PikaPika0105 It's not just the pharmaceutical companies. This can easily be transferred to so many areas. The oil industry, politics, etc... Self-preservation comes first everywhere. I think there's a consensus across the various companies and parties. Call it conspiracy theories. I can live with that. Unfortunately, we've just learned the hard way that sometimes there's more to it than you can imagine.
But I won't try to exorcize you of your lofty worldview. It's all fine. We all look at the world through different eyes. And that's a good thing.
But I won't try to exorcize you of your lofty worldview. It's all fine. We all look at the world through different eyes. And that's a good thing.
•
11
•@Daniel1212 agree to disagree 🤝🏼
•
11
•
@Daniel1212 Many of these diseases — including diabetes and obesity (currently in the financial hype, unfortunately) — are extremely complex. They often involve metabolic dysfunction, which is highly individual. People sleep different numbers of hours, have different diets, vary in activity levels, and are influenced not only by genetics but also by parental lifestyle and environmental factors.
IMO, no single medication or intervention will ever “cure” everyone, given the current technology available for R&D. The realistic goal in the short term is to improve quality of life and life expectancy, and many treatments already do that.
It is also worth acknowledging that society often expects science and pharma to provide all the solutions instead of addressing even minimal lifestyle changes. That’s understandably difficult for patients, especially in a society where unhealthy habits are deeply structural.
Notably, if a company or research group truly discovered a cure, it would be one of the most profitable and historically significant breakthroughs imaginable. Suggesting that pharma “doesn’t want a cure” ignores both the scientific complexity and the financial incentive behind real advances.
The cure will come. It is just a question of knowledge and technology.
IMO, no single medication or intervention will ever “cure” everyone, given the current technology available for R&D. The realistic goal in the short term is to improve quality of life and life expectancy, and many treatments already do that.
It is also worth acknowledging that society often expects science and pharma to provide all the solutions instead of addressing even minimal lifestyle changes. That’s understandably difficult for patients, especially in a society where unhealthy habits are deeply structural.
Notably, if a company or research group truly discovered a cure, it would be one of the most profitable and historically significant breakthroughs imaginable. Suggesting that pharma “doesn’t want a cure” ignores both the scientific complexity and the financial incentive behind real advances.
The cure will come. It is just a question of knowledge and technology.
•
11
•