Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Kevin Rose who wrote (14710)	11/15/2006 9:23:00 AM
From: Peter Dierks	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 71588

Most drugs are developed without any government funding at all. Certain drugs receive extra benefits under the Orphan Drug Law (assuming it was renewed recently). There is little theoretical here, only finding natural substances which are used homeopathically and discovering what the effects are and then isolating and reproducing. After a drug therapy is understood, then research is dons to improve the process, often resulting in related drugs with patents that run beyond the original one. The real driver here is the monopoly granted under the patent. In medical devices it works similarly. Here big pharma funds start ups which either develop the technology with the supplied funding or fail. Notice that government funding is missing from both. My understanding is that government medical research is typically limited to areas like disease control and infrastructure issues. I don't see dead baby stem cells as an infrastructure. How is increased access to abortions going to pave the road to the future?