Unfortunately, the drug that prevents HIV infection, lenacapavir, is currently unaffordable at $42,250 for the first year. If it were sold by Gilead for $40 per year, it would still yield them a 30% profit. But I guess that’s not how capitalism works. www.nature.com/articles/d41...
Injections of the drug lenacapavir protected sexually active women and girls in Africa from the virus. Injections of the drug lenacapavir protected sexually active women and girls in Africa from the v...
Simple math excersice. If they sold it at $40, lot more people could afford it. I'd guess it would sell at least 100000 times more, which would make 100 times bigger profit for them. But I guess simple math is not appreciated at megacorps 🤷🏼♂️
I’ve a rare cancer that is currently stage 4. 6 in 1 million vs 17 in 1000 for HIV I’m on my 2nd treatment protocol. This treatment is extremely expensive. At the moment, it’s keeping me alive. The R&D put into this drug by $IMCR is huge and their scientists should get paid
Slimmest margins highest profit. Same rule as shipping safety
Every time I hear "Gilead" I think Handmaid's Tale, I can't help it.
Thank your for this post. If you'll kindly follow back I have a message that you may find of interest.
Gilead made billions on Truvada, even though US government paid for R&D & held relevant patents. Did US taxpayers pay for any of the R&D in this case? www.nytimes.com/2019/11/08/h...
In an unexpected lawsuit, federal officials claim that Gilead Sciences willfully disregarded government patents on medicines necessary to end the AIDS epidemic.
is too cynical to imagine mgmt at Gilead brainstorming ways to get HIV to spread wildly again?
CEO bonuses don't come from nowhere, you know.
That's not how anything works -- that $40/year does not yield them a 30% profit, it is about 30% over the manufacturing cost, which does not even begin to come close to profitability given the (most likely) billions spent on R&D for it.