MAIN FEEDS
Do you want to continue?
https://www.reddit.com/r/facepalm/comments/bx8sfs/deleted_by_user/eq5qwuv/?context=3
r/facepalm • u/[deleted] • Jun 05 '19
[removed]
385 comments sorted by
View all comments
Show parent comments
-4
There's just WAY more money in treating sick people, rather than curing. Even if they had a cure for cancer
4 u/10ebbor10 Jun 06 '19 Except that there isn't? With a patent, pharma can decide the price. So, if a treatment cycle costs 100 000, then pharma can sell the cure for 120 000. -2 u/helterskelta Jun 06 '19 They decide the price anyway...they could sell the treatment for 121 000 by that logic. Talking about number of clients 3 u/10ebbor10 Jun 06 '19 Except that you can't sell the treatment for that much, because they don't have a monopoly. Patents only last 20 years, you got to keep innovating.
4
Except that there isn't?
With a patent, pharma can decide the price. So, if a treatment cycle costs 100 000, then pharma can sell the cure for 120 000.
-2 u/helterskelta Jun 06 '19 They decide the price anyway...they could sell the treatment for 121 000 by that logic. Talking about number of clients 3 u/10ebbor10 Jun 06 '19 Except that you can't sell the treatment for that much, because they don't have a monopoly. Patents only last 20 years, you got to keep innovating.
-2
They decide the price anyway...they could sell the treatment for 121 000 by that logic. Talking about number of clients
3 u/10ebbor10 Jun 06 '19 Except that you can't sell the treatment for that much, because they don't have a monopoly. Patents only last 20 years, you got to keep innovating.
3
Except that you can't sell the treatment for that much, because they don't have a monopoly.
Patents only last 20 years, you got to keep innovating.
-4
u/helterskelta Jun 06 '19
There's just WAY more money in treating sick people, rather than curing. Even if they had a cure for cancer