The US is spreading ebola and is using Africa as a bio-weapon testing ground

[bizzaro]

That first article is global r and d spending not global medical r and d spending.

That makes a huge difference.

Its global life sciences R&D spending which is precisely the same as global medical R&D spending.

 

[Allezfan]

And yes damon, we spend more on healthcare than on either miltary or drug research but all I said was that "as a society we spend much less on curing diseases then we do on building weapons".

And we do.

 

[SerenityNigh]

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/2...-develop-drugs-rich-westerners-not-poor.shtml

Interesting comments, but in some manner it's rather obvious; few businesses develop products specifically for those that knowingly cannot pay for them. It might be better to ask where is the money going to come from to provide cheap, safe medicine to developing nations?

Still, this ignores the major problem in India: sanitation and basic health care. Without wide and cheap access to these, medicine has little efficacy.

 

[bizzaro]

This is the paper that article you're quoting gets the data from. http://www.rdmag.com/sites/rdmag.com/files/gff-2014-5_7 875x10_0.pdf.

It accurately says that 1.6 trillion us dollars is spent on r&d a year. Which is less than is spent on military a year.

But that's r&d for everything. A graph on the 16th page of that document shows how much of that r & d is spent on developing weapons or power or computers or what have you and only 10% is on drugs. Which give us .16 trillion on medical r&d which is much less than the 1.7 trillion spent on miltary.

My point stands.

Your point doesn't stand when the world spends FOUR TIMES the amount on global medical healthcare and medical R&D than it does on military spending.

Its nonsense to try and claim it stands.

Its a point like a wet paper bag

 

[Allezfan]

Its global life sciences R&D spending which is precisely the same as global medical R&D spending.

No, it isn't. Seriously read the damn article you're linking next time.

 

[bizzaro]

No, it isn't. Seriously read the damn article you're linking next time.

I did read it. Do you know what life sciences are?

Do you not see all the main companies indicated are PHARMA companies?

 

[RAFUH]

Check out how many pharmaceutical generics are made in India and where they don't need to obey or get around patent laws.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pharmaceutical_industry_in_India

You'll find that the western companies profit cliché isn't what it seems.

The cliche is Big Pharma makes big money. How does India manufacturering generics change that in the US?

These generics (if still on patent in US) can not be sold in any US pharmacy and there are strict controls on pharmacies outside of the US.
Obviously other markets can be affected.

 

[Allezfan]

I did read it. Do you know what life sciences are?

Do you not see all the main companies indicated are PHARMA companies?

How stupid can you be?

Seriously, you have linked to an article talking about life science r&d.

In that article it meantions a report which I have linked to above about global r&d in eveything.

That report has produced a number which is how much is spent on global r&d in every industry.

The article you link to meantions that and then says this

"In the life sciences industry, the biopharmaceutical sector accounts for 85 percent of all R&D expenditures. Battelle-R&D forecast’s the global to have a healthy recovery after a flat 2013, growing 3.1 percent to $201 billion in 2014. R&D spending in the U.S. life sciences industry is expected to grow a modest 2.2 percent to about $93 million, with growth primarily coming from smaller biopharmaceutical innovators and medical device manufacturers. "

It then produces that graph which talks about the life sciences industry.

That does not mean that the original sum of 1.6 trillion from the burril report is talking just about the life science industry.

It is not.

You've just misread that article completely.

 

[bizzaro]

The cliche is Big Pharma makes big money. How does India manufacturering generics change that in the US?

These generics (if still on patent in US) can not be sold in any US pharmacy and there are strict controls on pharmacies outside of the US.
Obviously other markets can be affected.

They can.

They can get around that as most of the patents either relate to (i) one molecule/active they can get around that by derivatising

or (ii) the process; they can get around that by developing a different synthesis.

 

[blue4eva77]

I did read it. Do you know what life sciences are?

Do you not see all the main companies indicated are PHARMA companies?

Interesting...

My company is on this graph.

 

[bizzaro]

How stupid can you be?

Seriously, you have linked to an article talking about life science r&d.

In that article it meantions a report which I have linked to above about global r&d in eveything.

That report has produced a number which is how much is spent on global r&d in every industry.

The article you link to meantions that and then says this

"In the life sciences industry, the biopharmaceutical sector accounts for 85 percent of all R&D expenditures. Battelle-R&D forecast’s the global to have a healthy recovery after a flat 2013, growing 3.1 percent to $201 billion in 2014. R&D spending in the U.S. life sciences industry is expected to grow a modest 2.2 percent to about $93 million, with growth primarily coming from smaller biopharmaceutical innovators and medical device manufacturers. "

It then produces that graph which talks about the life sciences industry.

That does not mean that the original sum of 1.6 trillion from the burril report is talking just about the life science industry.

It is not.

You've just misread that article completely.

Even if the figure of 85% of 1.6 trillion is correct - that's still US $1.36 trillion.

On top of the global health care spending of US $ 6.1 trillion that's US $ 7.46 trillion.

STILL WAY OVER the military spending of US $ 1.75 trillion!


The point you made was nonsense. Medical spending is massively higher than military spending.

Your point has been blown over like a fence post in a hurricane.

 

[SerenityNigh]

Your point has been blown over like a fence post in a hurricane.

 

[RAFUH]

Even if the figure of 85% of 1.6 trillion is correct - that's still US $1.36 trillion.

On top of the global health care spending of US $ 6.1 trillion that's US $ 7.46 trillion.

STILL WAY OVER the military spending of US $ 1.75 trillion!


The point you made was nonsense. Medical spending is massively higher than military spending.

Your point has been blown over like a fence post in a hurricane.

And as a society we spend much less on curing diseases then we do on building weapons.

@Allezfan didn't say overall medical spending is less than military spending. He was specific about cures for disease which is only a small part of R&D and nothing to do with healthcare spending (ie hospitals, doctors - active care of patients)

 

[bizzaro]

@Allezfan didn't say overall medical spending is less than military spending. He was specific about cures for disease which is only a small part of R&D and nothing to do with healthcare spending (ie hospitals, doctors - active care of patients)

Wrong.

Pharmacys do prioritise treatments over cures when it comes to drug research, of course they do.

They also have incredibly shoddy drug testing procedures that leads to useless drugs often being commisioned.

And they try their best to prevent drug recipes being released so they can overcharge for them even if that means people die as a result.

And as a society we spend much less on curing diseases then we do on building weapons.

All of these things are true.

I feel like Ashtonian isn't being as completely insane as people are making out.

Overall medical and medical R&D spending = spending on curing diseases

 

[Allezfan]

Even if the figure of 85% of 1.6 trillion is correct - that's still US $1.36 trillion.

On top of the global health care spending of US $ 6.1 trillion that's US $ 7.46 trillion.

STILL WAY OVER the military spending of US $ 1.75 trillion!


The point you made was nonsense. Medical spending is massively higher than military spending.

Your point has been blown over like a fence post in a hurricane.

The figure isn't 85% of 1.6 trillion though.

It's not close to that.

You just can't read.

This is a direct quote from that article you linked.

"In the life sciences industry, the biopharmaceutical sector accounts for 85 percent of all R&D expenditures. Battelle-R&D forecast’s the global to have a healthy recovery after a flat 2013, growing 3.1 percent to $201 billion in 2014."

See that figure there?

$201 billion.

That's how much we spend on medical r&d.