Closed Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 21 to 36 of 36
  1. #21

    Quote Originally Posted by Meresgi View Post
    Not unheard of, companies spend a FUCKTON of cash to research these things and that's why they are so Scrooge McDuck over giving them out to people, because they are basically betting the entire company while hoping the drug will recoup all their investments and make put them in the black.
    I highly doubt that the company itself is 200 mil in the red. They've probably invested (gambled) 200 mil researching this particular drug, but if a company was already 200 mil in the red and didn't have a drug to market, their investors would back out so fast your head would spin.

  2. #22

    Quote Originally Posted by Blubbartron View Post
    I highly doubt that the company itself is 200 mil in the red. They've probably invested (gambled) 200 mil researching this particular drug, but if a company was already 200 mil in the red and didn't have a drug to market, their investors would back out so fast your head would spin.
    Not at all.

    $200m is a drop in the bucket compared to a market capitalization in the hundreds of billions, and yearly revenue streams that are not very far behind.

    Pfizer, for example, has a market cap of $200 [i]billion[i]; and that isn't even the highest one, or the peak for that specific company. Their yearly operating revenue is around $50 billion, at current. $200m is nothing for a company like Pfizer (zomg, 0.4% of their revenue!?!).

    It of course wouldn't be good news for the company, and would likely hurt their stock, but people wouldn't be fleeing... especially not with a potentially ground-breaking drug in trials. It is not completely uncommon at all for companies like this to go massively in debt on a project (or even as a company) in the process of getting a new drug on the market. Hence why they're granted a 'free monopoly' on that drug for X amount of time, selling it at 10,000% profit margins to make that investment loss back a few/several times over.

  3. #23
    Groinlonger
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    2,964
    BG Level
    7
    FFXI Server
    Fenrir

    It seems mostly to do with the requirements of a compassionate case use more than money. They are required to do followup and actually take ownership over the patient, it's more than simply just giving them the drug. Now multiply this for every patient that wants compassionate use with every experimental drug. That is a stupid expectation to put on a company.

  4. #24

    I'm surprised no one has actually just turned around to this family and said "God hates your kid" 4 cancers and hes only 7? what kind of poor existence must this child have?. i'm a compassionate person when it comes down to it, the best thing to do would be just let the kid die in peace.

  5. #25
    The Shitlord
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    11,366
    BG Level
    9
    FFXIV Character
    Kharo Hadakkus
    FFXIV Server
    Hyperion
    FFXI Server
    Sylph
    WoW Realm
    Rivendare

    says you. youre not the one with cancer.

  6. #26
    Like a boss yo
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    3,860
    BG Level
    7
    FFXI Server
    Odin
    WoW Realm
    Mal'Ganis

    No sir, you see, he would obviously feel the same way if he had cancer... CAN'T YOU SEE THAT BANE !

  7. #27
    Caesar Salad
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    28,301
    BG Level
    10

    Quote Originally Posted by Arcana View Post
    I'm surprised no one has actually just turned around to this family and said "God hates your kid" 4 cancers and hes only 7? what kind of poor existence must this child have?. i'm a compassionate person when it comes down to it, the best thing to do would be just let the kid die in peace.
    You obviously don't have children and are too young to understand why what you said is stupid.

  8. #28
    HABS SUCK!!!!!
    Sepukku is my Hero
    Therrien's Cum Dumpster

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    37,942
    BG Level
    10
    FFXI Server
    Gilgamesh

    Sounds like devils advocate to mock the people who rely on prayers for healing.

    Or just really stupid

  9. #29
    BG Medical's Student of Medicine
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    30,595
    BG Level
    10

    These are really statistical issues at best, and are pretty much the same reason some surgeons are hesitant to operate on people that might die anyway. It ruins their "stats".

    Just another reason why metrics are fucking retarded.

  10. #30
    Tagus
    Guest

    metrics are totally retarded indeed... they inspire business decisions based on dollars instead of helping people, which is why the majority of healthcare workers got into their respective fields. The problem is, healthcare companies are run by business people who care more about money than their employees or the patients their companies are set up to serve. Obamacare and the poor economy scares the fuck out of them, so its all about "doing more with less" these days. The irony is they're making more money than ever right now because they're running so lean, while simultaneously destroying the stability of healthcare in general. Its a fucking mess, and its only going to get worse.


    For example, let's say you're running a hospital. Obamacare won't cover some of the things you've been routinely doing for years. What do you do? Cut doctor's salaries? Refuse to accept Obamacare patients? Lay off some nurses, some radiology people? Lay off some med techs who's salaries aren't that high to begin with? Cut overtime? No matter which you choose, you're pissing people off and seeing less patients than before, which means the pharma companies and manufacturers are loosing revenue. So then, what do those companies do? Lay off employees? Cut research and development? Reduce manufacturing costs and potentially fuck up your supply chain by either causing problems in your process or risking FDA restrictions? Then what... raise prices for easy to make drugs by 2000% to make up the difference? And if you're in manufacturing, all the while the FDA is crushing you with stricter requirements because of that New England thing from a couple years ago...... like I said.. its a mess. I'm sure it will work out in the end because people need a healthcare system that functions, but its going be a constantly evolving industry for a while until things settle down.

  11. #31
    BG Content
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    21,105
    BG Level
    10
    FFXI Server
    Lakshmi
    Blog Entries
    1

    Did this kid die yet and tank that startup company?

    Answer: No
    http://www.foxnews.com/health/2014/0...fesaving-drug/

  12. #32
    Yoshi P
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    5,112
    BG Level
    8
    FFXI Server
    Ramuh

    I think it might of been better to keep this shit out of the media even tho its working. That company is going to have 500 more requests now LOL and 500 more media shit storms.

  13. #33
    Caesar Salad
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    28,301
    BG Level
    10

    Quote Originally Posted by dejet View Post
    I think it might of been better to keep this shit out of the media even tho its working. That company is going to have 500 more requests now LOL and 500 more media shit storms.
    This is exactly why they were apprehensive. They didn't need more medical data, and caving to public pressure now paints a target on them for similar people who threaten bad media in exchange for free medicine that will save a life.

  14. #34
    Irish Vagabond
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    535
    BG Level
    5

    Ish.

    I'd say there'd be diminishing marginal returns on media exposure to this.

    The company got alot of crap for the first kid, because it was -just- poor identifiable "Timmy", however, when Jane, Tom, Abdul, Deron....n+500, all go the same route of Timmy, they wont have the same success because the ticket Timmy used has very limited uses.

    Sure the company will be dealing with all the requests, but they won't have the external pressure that Timmy's case caused because the media/social networking wont care enough to go back to that well (think: "Aren't we great, we saved Timmy, lets move onto our next cause").

  15. #35
    Relic Shield
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,588
    BG Level
    6

    Quote Originally Posted by Tagus View Post
    problem is, if the kid takes the drug and still dies, the fda may not approve it to be sold ever in the future because there is now a statistical record of a child having died after taking it. any time somebody dies after taking a new medication it really hurts the company's chances of getting it approved. shit sucks man.
    if I recall correctly, there are still quite number of legal issue on using the non approved drug on patients inside states. My ex-housemate, also my friend work in a drug testing company, based in Malaysia. Basically what the company did is help these company test the drug on human patient (developing countries does not care as long as it is cheap lol). And 3 years study just still on the initial phase, according to him, it would take up to 5 years of follow up study. Before the company will submit for approve usage in states.

  16. #36
    Banned.

    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    2
    BG Level
    0

    Parents should pay dollar for drugs for dying child.


    User was infracted for this post.