|
Regretably from my reading the reality is much more complex.
The reseach has to be done to confirm and put the treatment into the wider domain which costs money, then theres getting it into the conciousness of the medical profession (more money), there is also the question of profit margins to hospitals etc (who have shareholders).......which if the treatment is inherently low cost not patentable is not likely to make significant contributions to the cost of deveolpement.......
It is not the result of any one decision but a miriad of knee jerks, that respond to the constraints of the situation they find themselves in... I bet "I would love to but - my boss - my budget .....(or similar)" is a frequent comment in such situations.
I have not read the particulars of this proposed treatment (but Lani is through and dedicated) and so do not comment on this particular case, but just my personal thoughts on why things that are reported as promising (but not financially rewarding) often appear not to be followed up by deeper trials.
And insurance companies are insurance companies and not into combative speculative non profitable drug development I guess.
RB
|