325
‘HIV-ending’ drug could be made for just $25 per patient a year, say researchers
(www.theguardian.com)
Infinite breeding here I cum!
this post was submitted on 17 Jun 2025
325 points (99.4% liked)
News
30265 readers
3950 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Well that'll never happen - not when the drug companies can sell $2000 a month or die medication to the inflicted for the rest of their lives.
They have to recoup their costs somehow. Their licence will expire after a while and other companies and make the product and therefore brigdown the price.
Can we hurry up with this please. I want to cum buckets in my femboy slut. OK, thx, bye.
Obama is welcome to join too
It costs you significantly leas than 25 bucks to not write shit like that
Let people be horny, it's the only thing keeping the corpo shitheads out of this place.
It costs significantly less to have a sense of humour.
But it won’t be
It'll cost $25 to produce. Selling cost is another matter entirely.
Oh, it will be, but they'll mark it up 100,000%
Then it won't be 25 dollars.
~~Nobody was saying it would be. The headline and article are about production costs at different scales, not prices for anyone buying it after that.~~
Hill had calculated a generic price of $40 annually last year, but said the interest from generic manufacturers had warranted new analysis. This showed lenacapavir could be mass produced for $35 to $46 a year, if there was annual demand for 2m doses, falling to $25 at scaled up production of 5m to 10m doses each year.
Oh wait, I missed a line where the article actually suggests this...
Dr Hill’s research indicates that this gamechanging innovation could – within a year of launch – be produced and sold for just $25 per person per year.
But you're right, they won't sell it for $0 of profit. It would be nice.
No they'll sell it for 50x what an annual treatment regimen costs. That way they can grind down the desperate and still profit off the rich.
Pharma C-suite:
that doesn’t sound very profitable
I fucking wish I was kidding
"But how does this expand shareholder value"
I mean, it doesn't actually end it, to have to keep taking their pill. It's a subscription model to life.
Pill
You could read the article before you comment lol
You caught me!
naming your company fucking "Gilead" is some torment nexus-ass shit
Yeah, I grimaced at the name and implications.
They are probably referencing the balm.
It looks like that's indeed the case, and they've been around long enough that Handmaid's probably wasn't that well-known at the time. Still, the irony is off the charts... have they considered changing their logo to the traditional four-armed rotationally-symmetric sacred Buddhist symbol? >.>
They considered, but there were too many other contenders.
i understand that if it costs $25 to make it then it needs to cost a bit more for supply chain, profits etc (regularly a 50% increase from factory and another 50% increase to retail), but i'll bet you a $500 bottle of HIV-ending drugs that this wont cost $56.25.
That $25 estimate included a 30% profit margin already.
$500 a bottle would be practically giving it away in the US. Most life sustaining meds or the rare cure are sold at unfathomable prices. One of my post-transplant anti rejection meds is $60,000 a month
Let's call it $100 per head.
Hey Elon, you wanna leave behind a legacy that doesn't suck?
Here's your last chance, asshole.
At $25-$50/yr with low to no risk of getting HIV I would get the shot. Just like a flu or COVID shot.
Twice yearly shot? Yup, sign me up.
As a medical provider, I'll probably be required to get it.
It's disgusting that drug companies prioritise massive profits over human suffering
They could still profit, just not the truly obscene profits they make, going into the pockets of people who are already rich
Billionaire: But you are wrong. I want them both. Massive profits AND human suffering.
This take generally comes from looking at the profits of successful drug X, while being unaware of (or ignoring) all of the drugs that have millions upon millions put into their R&D, that never result in anything that can go to market.
Overall profits will seem much higher than they actually are if you leave out that very-relevant data.
I worked in health care
I'm familiar
I've heard all the arguments, and I know how much money is poured into drugs that don't go anywhere
I also know how their shareholders and executives fare, and I stand behind my statement
Hasn't it been proven time and time again most money in big pharma is pumped into advertising?
That wouldn't surprise me,
Having said that, it's not common for pharmaceutical ads to be legal
It's classically 'Murican
A few other countries allow drug advertising, but not many
A lot of that R&D comes from grants and universities as well as tax incentives and write offs.
Gilead
Oh, so it's assured they will bleed people dry then, based on this company's track record.
This is the drug I'm super hyped about. Even if it was $35, it would be life-changing for millions of people.
Shit, let's make it $100 per year so they can make lots of money.
you’re thinking too small
1000$/year baybeee!
or rather, they’ll find the perfect balance of profitability, between how many people can afford it VS how much they’d pay for it
the poors will die but that is a sacrifice they are enthusiastic to make