Biotech Values

[poorgradstudent]

RTRX:

I would argue two directions on this. First, there is value-add beyond approval (in many ways beyond what I will suggest). Second, Profits and Capital Allocation - our system allows pricing freedom and relies on market functions to operate on pricing (generics and competing products) and capital allocation producing profits that are a key driver of capital allocation promoting drug development in next-stage growth.

Your two general themes of value addition and profit allocation are entirely valid and I don't deny them. In my defense (!), I've not really piped up on orphan drug and drug pricing all that much because I do think I have a general understanding of the necessities that these companies face. I've initially been skeptical of ultra-orphan drug pricing, but have seen these companies follow up with additional and novel development. I also have noted previously that high prices at the onset are the price we pay for the long term benefits to society, which are strengthened with eventual decreases in price through the introduction of generics.

I just think RTRX is the wrong hill to plant the flag. This CEO has no history of doing any value addition, and his performance to date for drug development has been scattershot and better described as overpromise rather than underdeliver.

And no, I don't think that demonizing the profit allocation motives of the RTRX CEO is the thin edge of the wedge... I just think this company and this example is not the one that best exemplifies the conundrum we face when looking at drug development and pricing.

The amusing thing to me is that many of the people (scientists) who benefit the most from this state of affairs, are oblivious to their benefactor.

Public sector scientists have lost any reasonable benefit from this state of affairs. I have long thoughts on that, but suffice to say that it's unclear to me that they're benefiting given the current set of national priorities.