Except in the United States, where it will be $1500 a dose.
And you have to take a dose everyday or some horrible side effect will occur.
Or it’ll be banned because it just facilitates the gay lifestyle.
I love your positivism thinking that it would only cost 1500 in the US
That’s $1,500 with a coupon and the highest tier healthcare coverage that very few people outside of tech workers actually get. You don’t want to know what the out-of-pocket cost for something like this would be.
But don’t worry! If you’re fortunate enough to have a job at a good company that pays well, then you can spend $300-$500 of your monthly paycheck to have an insurance company possibly cover up to 80% of the cost! Assuming you are in-network, picked the right plan, followed all the confusing steps to file a claim, and aren’t disqualified by one of their dozens of contingencies.
Land of the free babay!
and aren’t disqualified by one of their dozens of contingencies
one of which is having HIV
Only 1500?
But it won’t be
Oh, it will be, but they’ll mark it up 100,000%
Then it won’t be 25 dollars.
Nobody was saying it would be. The headline and article are about production costs at different scales, not prices for anyone buying it after that.Hill had calculated a generic price of $40 annually last year, but said the interest from generic manufacturers had warranted new analysis. This showed lenacapavir could be mass produced for $35 to $46 a year, if there was annual demand for 2m doses, falling to $25 at scaled up production of 5m to 10m doses each year.
Oh wait, I missed a line where the article actually suggests this…
Dr Hill’s research indicates that this gamechanging innovation could – within a year of launch – be produced and sold for just $25 per person per year.
But you’re right, they won’t sell it for $0 of profit. It would be nice.
FDA can grant exclusivity to that drug. And then once there’s finally a generic that can also be granted a one year exclusivity. The FDA facilitates scarcity.
No they’ll sell it for 50x what an annual treatment regimen costs. That way they can grind down the desperate and still profit off the rich.
It’ll cost $25 to produce. Selling cost is another matter entirely.
Well that’ll never happen - not when the drug companies can sell $2000 a month or die medication to the inflicted for the rest of their lives.
They have to recoup their costs somehow. Their licence will expire after a while and other companies and make the product and therefore brigdown the price.
It’s not like we have taxes to pay for such things (at least anymore thx to Doge)
It’s nutty this comment is downvoted to oblivion but “infinite breeding here we cum” idiot is getting upvotes.
It’s shit, but it’s true. The company that researched this amazing thing needs to get paid.
Maybe we could just give them $20b to forego their royalties, but then what if a better drug was developed next year which we wanted instead?
Until someone solves the problem of funding medications, this will be the reality.
It’s getting downvoted to oblivion because it ignores many things, namely the fact that a lot of drug research worldwide is state-funded. There are many cases in which pharmaceutical companies use public funds for R&D, and then go on to sell the drug at steep prices, raking in immense profits.
Meanwhile the public has to either cough up the bucks, or wait until the patent expires to have affordable options.
These are generalisations. It’s facebook grandma reasoning.
What elements of the R&D process for this medication were state funded and to what extent?
Loads of industries receive support and incentives and grants from governments, they’re not required to give their product away?
There’s no doubt that large components of the medical industry, and the pharmaceutical industry are unethical profiteers.
It’s also true that the research needs to be funded somehow.
My point is, there is nuance here that most lemmy users just aren’t interested in. It’s not as simple as “pharma bad”.
Can we hurry up with this please. I want to cum buckets in my femboy slut. OK, thx, bye.
Thats the spirit !
Obama is welcome to join too
It costs you significantly leas than 25 bucks to not write shit like that
Let people be horny, it’s the only thing keeping the corpo shitheads out of this place.
Hm, never thought about it from this perspective. In this case, penis then. Balls even.
It costs significantly less to have a sense of humour.
Let the debaucherous degenerate have their fun. Not like they’re hurting anyone, unlike the profligates known as the Mormons.
I came here to write about fucking monkeys
Just wanted you to know 🙂
Im okay with it.
Pharma C-suite:
that doesn’t sound very profitable
I fucking wish I was kidding
“But how does this expand shareholder value”
I mean, it doesn’t actually end it, to have to keep taking their pill. It’s a subscription model to life.
Pill
You could read the article before you comment lol
You caught me!
Infinite breeding here I cum!
i understand that if it costs $25 to make it then it needs to cost a bit more for supply chain, profits etc (regularly a 50% increase from factory and another 50% increase to retail), but i’ll bet you a $500 bottle of HIV-ending drugs that this wont cost $56.25.
That $25 estimate included a 30% profit margin already.
$500 a bottle would be practically giving it away in the US. Most life sustaining meds or the rare cure are sold at unfathomable prices. One of my post-transplant anti rejection meds is $60,000 a month
Let’s call it $100 per head.
Hey Elon, you wanna leave behind a legacy that doesn’t suck?
Here’s your last chance, asshole.
naming your company fucking “Gilead” is some torment nexus-ass shit
the company has been around for a long time, before the book was made famous, one of the first things i saw when applying to lab/biotech was gilead position for scientists. this was already 10 years ago.
they even have transportaiton buses from our city to thier campuses, because its quite far away from a city if you work in biotech.
yeah, I did check dates after, my irony circuits were just too fried when I first read it >.>
They are probably referencing the balm.
It looks like that’s indeed the case, and they’ve been around long enough that Handmaid’s probably wasn’t that well-known at the time. Still, the irony is off the charts… have they considered changing their logo to the traditional four-armed rotationally-symmetric sacred Buddhist symbol? >.>
No they’re going with a sonnenrad.
They considered, but there were too many other contenders.
Yeah, I grimaced at the name and implications.
At $25-$50/yr with low to no risk of getting HIV I would get the shot. Just like a flu or COVID shot.
Twice yearly shot? Yup, sign me up.
As a medical provider, I’ll probably be required to get it.
If this shot were to become common in the gay community, would that just leave the IV drug community to be the main transmitter of HIV? Could we potentially see HIV effectively eradicated?
I don’t really know bit my supposition would be that eradication isn’t really on the table presently.
This is only a prophylactic. There are people right now with HIV who (excluding a “cure” emerging) will be potentially infectious in 40 or 50 years.
In the short to medium term making this accessible to populations in areas with a high prevalence could avoid millions of infections.
It’s disgusting that drug companies prioritise massive profits over human suffering
They could still profit, just not the truly obscene profits they make, going into the pockets of people who are already rich
Billionaire: But you are wrong. I want them both. Massive profits AND human suffering.
This take generally comes from looking at the profits of successful drug X, while being unaware of (or ignoring) all of the drugs that have millions upon millions put into their R&D, that never result in anything that can go to market.
Overall profits will seem much higher than they actually are if you leave out that very-relevant data.
I worked in health care
I’m familiar
I’ve heard all the arguments, and I know how much money is poured into drugs that don’t go anywhere
I also know how their shareholders and executives fare, and I stand behind my statement
Hasn’t it been proven time and time again most money in big pharma is pumped into advertising?
That wouldn’t surprise me,
Having said that, it’s not common for pharmaceutical ads to be legal
It’s classically 'Murican
A few other countries allow drug advertising, but not many
All that research leans so fucking heavily on public universities
Drug companies dont spend money on r&d anymore.
A lot of that R&D comes from grants and universities as well as tax incentives and write offs.
Gilead
Oh, so it’s assured they will bleed people dry then, based on this company’s track record.
This is the drug I’m super hyped about. Even if it was $35, it would be life-changing for millions of people.
Shit, let’s make it $100 per year so they can make lots of money.
you’re thinking too small
1000$/year baybeee!
or rather, they’ll find the perfect balance of profitability, between how many people can afford it VS how much they’d pay for it
the poors will die but that is a sacrifice they are enthusiastic to make
