• UmeU@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    34
    arrow-down
    13
    ·
    7 months ago

    If this were true, I wouldn’t be finding out about it on Lemmy

    • zephyreks@lemmy.mlM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      44
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      7 months ago

      Lemmy is a news aggregator. Why wouldn’t you find out about an early-stage clinical trial on Lemmy?

      Any such treatment, even if it works, would take decades to pass through the various approval stages before being released to the public.

      • UmeU@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        7 months ago

        The headline isn’t ’early stage clinical trial starts the multi-decade process of developing a cure for diabetes’… the headline reads ‘diabetes has been cured’

        Alls I’m saying is that if the headline as written were true, we would be hearing it from all news sources at once, not just some single post on a somewhat obscure news aggregator.

      • ɔiƚoxɘup@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        Right? Media and science do not play well together. I can’t count the times I’ve seen amazing new discoveries or cures heralded by the media that never come to fruition because they were only ever just theoretical to begin with or they were never replicated by any other researcher.

      • UmeU@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        How would reading Cell Discovery increase my chances of hearing about a cure to one of the world’s most pervasive afflictions on some obscure Lemmy post, and more puzzling, how would reading Cell Discovery make it more likely that some wild medical claim with far reaching implications would both be true and also absent from every other news source? What kind of magic does this Cell Discovery have?

    • 𝘋𝘪𝘳𝘬@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      27
      ·
      7 months ago

      If this were true you wouldn’t hear from this at all.

      A permanent cure isn’t something that is wanted by pharma companies. It’s better for them to have something that keeps patients alive and that they need regularly and that is expensive but cheap enough for them to get.

      • threeduck@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        7 months ago

        But why wouldn’t a rival company just start up and sell the cures? Not all pharma companies sell insulin.

        • matcha_addict@lemy.lol
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          The bar to entry in the pharma market is extremely high. You need a lot of capital to enter it, which quickly disqualifies 95% of the population.

          Now of course, people without money can still get funding from investors. But those investors are already racking big profits from the continuous model of insulin treatments. A cure would be a detriment to their profits, so it’s not something they’re interested in funding. Not all pharma is insulin, but it’s one of the bigger pharma industries.

          This isn’t to mention that if you were one of the 5% and managed to have the resources to find and produce a cure, that the other mega corporations (with more funds than most of those 5% individuals) wouldn’t engage in anti competitive practices to shut you down. Many companies had good products but still ultimately failed.

          Unfortunately capitalism does not allow innovation to flourish like many of us were taught to believe.

        • 𝘋𝘪𝘳𝘬@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          9
          ·
          7 months ago

          Because then the rival company would also go out of business. The pharma industry is not about absolute cure but about continuously selling things - like all industries do. Medicine that cures you entirely and is not needed afterwards forever again is nothing the pharma industry wants.

          • AbsentBird@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            27
            ·
            7 months ago

            Exactly, that’s why we’ll never have a vaccine for something like polio, it’s too profitable to make and sell iron lungs.

            • BarbecueCowboy@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              7 months ago

              You joke, but that’s actually a really interesting story. Jonas Salk, the developer of the first polio vaccine was adamantly against even patenting it and claimed that it ‘belonged to the people’. There is some potential controversy there, but we mostly just think he was a pretty great dude. Dude’s a fucking hero regardless.

              I get the analogy you’re trying to make, but maybe want to switch to something else.

              • CileTheSane
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                7 months ago

                I get the analogy you’re trying to make, but maybe want to switch to something else.

                Like any other vaccine?

              • AbsentBird@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                edit-2
                7 months ago

                I don’t really see how that goes against it. If anything it shows that some people will totally disregard profit in favor of bettering humanity. See also: the patent for insulin.

      • Mossheart
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        7 months ago

        Pharma wants that sweet IaaS platform. Insulin-as-a-service.