TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Open Letter from Gilead CEO: Remdesivir Pricing

38 点作者 drinker将近 5 年前

18 条评论

flak48将近 5 年前
Indian companies have already started manufacturing Remdesivir (under license from Gilead) and selling them at a price of ~$70.<p>I wonder how other countries are going to respond since the US seems to have bought up the entire global stockpile from Gilead (who are charging $390 - $520 to Americans).<p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.hindustantimes.com&#x2F;india-news&#x2F;india-s-hetero-prices-generic-remdesivir-for-covid-19-treatment-at-rs5-400-per-vial&#x2F;story-kvqLE7vfjarEaj8Y1ad5lJ.html" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.hindustantimes.com&#x2F;india-news&#x2F;india-s-hetero-pri...</a><p>[2] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.indiatvnews.com&#x2F;business&#x2F;news-covid19-drug-cipremi-price-dosage-cipla-remdesivir-cipremi-price-covid-19-treatment-drug-covifor-fabiflu-628798" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.indiatvnews.com&#x2F;business&#x2F;news-covid19-drug-cipre...</a>
apsec112将近 5 年前
This isn&#x27;t just paying for the R&amp;D on remdesivir itself. It&#x27;s paying for all of the other antivirals which were developed and then failed clinical trials, and all the other antivirals that turned out to be largely useless because (like SARS, MERS, and Ebola) there was never a large-scale outbreak. If you require remdesivir to be sold at cost, then any company developing antivirals will reason out:<p>Scenario A: There&#x27;s a huge pandemic and massive demand, but the drug can only be sold at cost, so we break even.<p>Scenario B: The drug fails clinical trials. We lose a bunch of money.<p>Scenario C: The drug works, but no pandemic ever happens. We lose a bunch of money.<p>.... and then no one will develop antivirals, because on average, you can only come out behind.<p>As to why the government can&#x27;t do everything itself, I&#x27;ll quote Paul Graham on venture investing, which (like drug development) is a highly technical, winner-take-all business where most projects fail:<p>&quot;Why not just have the government, or some large almost-government organization like Fannie Mae, do the venture investing instead of private funds?<p>I&#x27;ll tell you why that wouldn&#x27;t work. Because then you&#x27;re asking government or almost-government employees to do the one thing they are least able to do: take risks.<p>As anyone who has worked for the government knows, the important thing is not to make the right choices, but to make choices that can be justified later if they fail. If there is a safe option, that&#x27;s the one a bureaucrat will choose. But that is exactly the wrong way to do venture investing. The nature of the business means that you want to make terribly risky choices, if the upside looks good enough.&quot;
评论 #23700843 未加载
ohazi将近 5 年前
&gt; In the U.S., the same government price of $390 per vial will apply. Because of the way the U.S. system is set up and the discounts that government healthcare programs expect, the price for U.S. private insurance companies, will be $520 per vial.<p><i>Sigh</i><p>How many years of normalizing and internalizing the utter insanity that is the US medical industrial complex does it take to be able to just say that with a straight face?
评论 #23698648 未加载
continuational将近 5 年前
I don&#x27;t really understand the outrage. Surely, the price is only too high in the event that they can&#x27;t sell their product? It&#x27;s a business, not a charity.<p>Other companies will be looking hungrily at these earnings and invest in developing their own antivirals---which is exactly the desired outcome.<p>Sure, it would be great to have this drug available to everyone right here, right now, for cheap. But investing on those terms is not very attractive; hence the drug simply wouldn&#x27;t exist.
评论 #23699025 未加载
trowawee将近 5 年前
American taxpayers contributed at least $70m to the development of this drug[0] and our reward is to be gouged by Gilead. It&#x27;s the exact same shit they&#x27;ve pulled with Truvada[1] and it&#x27;s grotesque.<p>[0]: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.citizen.org&#x2F;article&#x2F;the-real-story-of-remdesivir&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.citizen.org&#x2F;article&#x2F;the-real-story-of-remdesivir...</a> [1]: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.nytimes.com&#x2F;2018&#x2F;07&#x2F;16&#x2F;opinion&#x2F;prep-hiv-aids-drug.html" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.nytimes.com&#x2F;2018&#x2F;07&#x2F;16&#x2F;opinion&#x2F;prep-hiv-aids-dru...</a>
评论 #23699641 未加载
评论 #23698951 未加载
评论 #23698807 未加载
udba将近 5 年前
They say the goal is to help as many people as possible, and that this principle has guided their development and pricing of the drug.<p>How do they reconcile this principle with the huge price difference between the USA and the rest of the world? Or between the developed world and the developing world?<p>I assume they are still making a profit selling doses at low costs to developing countries. If the goal is to help as many people like they say, why not extend that pricing to everyone?<p>It’s disappointing that taxpayers fund the development of these drugs and then get screwed by the same companies when it comes time to make a profit.
评论 #23698782 未加载
评论 #23698773 未加载
评论 #23699054 未加载
评论 #23698852 未加载
评论 #23698797 未加载
josefrichter将近 5 年前
Aside from the sensitive topic of pricing the new drug, I&#x27;d like to take this opportunity to remember the late Czech scientist Antonin Holy.<p>His lifelong research led to creation of many groundbreaking drugs against HIV, hepatitis and now Covid. This humble &quot;invisible&quot; guy&#x27;s work literally saved millions of lives and is behind many of current Gilead drugs.<p>See <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;english.radio.cz&#x2F;antonin-holy-one-countrys-most-renowned-scientists-8591332" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;english.radio.cz&#x2F;antonin-holy-one-countrys-most-reno...</a>
Pick-A-Hill2019将近 5 年前
This Open Letter is bullshit (purely personal opinion obviously). I note they are transparent about the pricing in specific markets but that the CEO fails to be so transparent about the pricing for generics in other markets. I’m aware of the studies regarding its effectiveness but hate hand-wavy B.S. like this so here&#x27;s some snippets taken from Gilead&#x27;s own website.<p>&quot;All descriptive printed matter, including advertising and promotional material, relating to the use of the remdesivir clearly and conspicuously shall state that: :the remdesivir have not been approved [sic] :the remdesivir have been authorized by FDA under an EUA [sic]&quot; page 6 <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.gilead.com&#x2F;-&#x2F;media&#x2F;files&#x2F;pdfs&#x2F;remdesivir&#x2F;eua-fda-authorization-letter_01may2020.pdf" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.gilead.com&#x2F;-&#x2F;media&#x2F;files&#x2F;pdfs&#x2F;remdesivir&#x2F;eua-fda...</a><p>and &quot;Remdesivir is an investigational drug that has not been approved by the FDA for any use.&quot; <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.gilead.com&#x2F;remdesivir" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.gilead.com&#x2F;remdesivir</a><p>I was in two minds about correcting the grammar but since they are all snips from the links decided to leave as is.<p>[Edit to clarify] My main point was that if they were pricing generics at a reasonable price they would have been trumpeting in the same press release as this. eg. if one is so reasonable that they openly discuss it then why not the pricing of generics.
tluyben2将近 5 年前
&gt; In normal circumstances, we would price a medicine according to the value it provides.<p>Which makes medicine so expensive that it provides no value to the many people who are in a bad position and cannot afford it. Pricing by the value something provides is only relevant for those who can afford that value in the first place (they assume you stay for the duration; you are lucky if you do not); for the rest it provides no value at all because they don&#x27;t get into that position in the first place.<p>As I read online, the entire treatment in India is well under $100[0]. I am all for getting the R&amp;D money back, but charging medicine based on value (who determines that value anyway; that&#x27;s highly subjective) it may provide is a recipe for disaster. Especially in this case; they stand to sell 10s of millions of these vials (even though they don&#x27;t really seem to &#x27;provide value&#x27; as clearly as advertised as others have mentioned here), so the R&amp;D&#x2F;investment story is... not very good.<p>[0] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.hindustantimes.com&#x2F;world-news&#x2F;european-regulator-recommends-remdesivir-for-covid-19-treatment&#x2F;story-r0rQr687STv1xcTvDGd3UK.html" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.hindustantimes.com&#x2F;world-news&#x2F;european-regulator...</a>
hasperdi将近 5 年前
What this letter did not address is the fact that the US is hoarding almost all of Gilead&#x27;s Remdesivir in the upcoming few months. Leaving the rest of the world with almost nothing.<p>Source: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.theguardian.com&#x2F;us-news&#x2F;2020&#x2F;jun&#x2F;30&#x2F;us-buys-up-world-stock-of-key-covid-19-drug" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.theguardian.com&#x2F;us-news&#x2F;2020&#x2F;jun&#x2F;30&#x2F;us-buys-up-w...</a>
评论 #23698840 未加载
评论 #23698915 未加载
评论 #23698919 未加载
评论 #23698876 未加载
评论 #23698877 未加载
评论 #23698733 未加载
SomeoneFromCA将近 5 年前
They did not know what to do with this drug, because it turned to be flop almost for every virus they tried. They would have scrapped it, if not for covid. Now they are telling us they need to recover R&amp;D price. Very funny.
评论 #23699223 未加载
listenallyall将近 5 年前
Seems expensive for a drug with &quot;no significant benefits&quot;<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.barrons.com&#x2F;news&#x2F;antiviral-remdesivir-showed-no-significant-benefit-in-virus-patients-01588174805" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.barrons.com&#x2F;news&#x2F;antiviral-remdesivir-showed-no-...</a>
kennywinker将近 5 年前
If it is an effective treatment, tell me why we should pay $2,340 per patient, and not just invalidate their patent on the grounds of public good? The US gov partially paid for its development in the first place.
评论 #23698848 未加载
评论 #23698829 未加载
Tinyyy将近 5 年前
At $2340 a patient, the drug is an expensive treatment plan but not overpriced imo. If the claimed reduction in time to recovery is true, then around $600 a day of reduced recovery time is probably worth the hospitalization and long term health costs.<p>Besides having to recoup the costs of development of Remdesivir, as well as the costs to trial various drugs that never make it to market, Remdesivir is currently in short supply and probably costs a significant amount to produce. It seems unreasonable to expect a good in such short supply to be sold for cheap. The overall cost of $2k isn’t prohibitively expensive such that many lives would be lost over this anyways.
jjeaff将近 5 年前
When you need a whole letter to explain the new price, you know it&#x27;s going to be loaded with crap and the price will be excessive. This one doesn&#x27;t disappoint.
评论 #23699561 未加载
sub7将近 5 年前
I do in $20 or less what costs $800 there. Americans pay probably $200 of that $800 and think &quot;oh insurance covered it&quot; when really they just payed 10x the price.<p>The US is so full of morons they must love being ripped off or something.
评论 #23703683 未加载
mesozoic将近 5 年前
Good thing we bailed them out bought their bonds and now get to pay way too much for a drug that don&#x27;t work! Yay!
forgingahead将近 5 年前
What&#x27;s the price of equivalent doses of Hydroxychloroquine + Zinc?
评论 #23698574 未加载
评论 #23699572 未加载