
Rapamycin’s secrets unearthed - sohkamyung
https://cen.acs.org/articles/94/i29/Rapamycins-Secrets-Unearthed.html
======
tominous
/...they needed to modify the molecule.. because the initial patent on
rapamycin expired in 1992. The company would need a novel compound to market
it in oncology./

So they had a good drug candidate already but needed to tweak it because of
the vagaries of IP law.

What a ridiculous situation. Has anyone devised a Shkreli-proof solution to
this public policy issue?

~~~
colechristensen
>Has anyone devised a Shkreli-proof solution to this public policy issue?

A tax on pharma profits which can be offset by both R&D on un-patentable
medicine and production of out-of-patent medicine. This would go to fund
(along with public funds) open drug research with statutory public domain
results.

~~~
tominous
That seems like only a partial solution. How do you allocate the resources
efficiently where they are needed most? How do you avoid waste? How do you
avoid kickbacks and corruption and pork-barelling? How do you minimise
administrative costs and delays?

Patents are good in that they tap into market economics to provide those
functions, but they seem incomplete in cases like this.

~~~
cam_l
"How do you avoid waste? How do you avoid kickbacks and corruption and pork-
barelling?"

This is often brought up in relation to public vs private funding. But private
funding is also massively wasteful and also involves a lot of pork barrelling.
It just isn't centralised or accountable.

Speculation, failed products (or worse yet, successful but bad or useless
products), failed businesses, and sales, compliance, patent and procurement
costs, all sit on top of the cost of designing and producing drugs. All split
up between different parties initially, but in the end shouldered by the
general public, both in outright costs and also in opportunity costs.

I reckon we could bear quite a bit of waste before it became worse than the
private sector.

~~~
tominous
I don't see how public spending is immune to speculation, failed products,
compliance and procurement costs! The rest are features, not bugs:

* failed businesses free up resources for more productive activity

* sales provide a feedback loop to ensure an efficient level of production

* patents provide an incentive for fast deployment of new technologies

And private spending is far more accountable because if an investor loses too
much money they are out of the game, whereas if a bureaucrat or politician
spends too much money they gain a bigger budget and a captive constituency.

Anyway I'm not too interested in this general discussion; I'd be more keen on
hearing if there are specific solutions to solve this particular problem,
whether using private or public money. Not just "fund it" which isn't really
meaningful without details.

~~~
cam_l
Well, I never said that it was not, although I think the mix is somewhat
different between private and public. Speculation and failed products might be
reduced with public funding, but procurement costs might be increased, for
example.

Anyway, I was making the point that while the costs of those things might
exist for both sectors—in the private sector they are split between multiple
parties but they are invisible and unaccountable—in the end they are still
borne by the consumer. On top of all that, you have lost opportunity costs
ie.in a private funded system we end up paying for things we don't even need,
rather than paying too much for something we do.

I just see this issue of public sector waste raised, and it seems to me more a
shibboleth than an accurate portrayal of the situation. Which is not to say
there are not very real issues around corruption and poor procurement with
government. But these exist in the private sector also, we just call it
business.

------
webaholic
tl;dr:

Don't rush to get your daily dose of rapamycin yet. It is untested in Humans
for aging purposes.

Instead, reduce your calorie intake. This has a similar effect to what
Rapamycin stimulates.

Eat less and prosper.

~~~
sdm
Or just don't eat meat and get the same effects as calorie restriction:

* [http://nutritionfacts.org/video/caloric-restriction-vs-anima...](http://nutritionfacts.org/video/caloric-restriction-vs-animal-protein-restriction/)

* [http://nutritionfacts.org/video/the-benefits-of-caloric-rest...](http://nutritionfacts.org/video/the-benefits-of-caloric-restriction-without-the-actual-restricting/)

