Comment by hellbannedguy | Hacker News Reader

Comment by hellbannedguy | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

China, and Russia, and other countries, are making big breakthroughs in biotech, but we are hesitant on believing their results--now.

They have the advantage of pushing through Clinical trials without much oversight.

I am all for strict Clinical trial protocols, but our biotech companies are testing their drugs in countries that don't have strict protocols on safety.

I don't get the price increase argument anymore. The biotech companies are multinational. It's just Americans give them the most money.

I'm getting afraid of the whole, "American biotech will cure anything because of the financial perks they get" mantra too.

I pay out of pocket for my needs at Costco. Their prices are a bit above wholesale. That said, I pay way to much for certain drugs. I guarantee their are shinagigans going on in the pricing if certain drugs.

Bupenorpine us a generic drug. Why gave I been paying $70 for a decade?

(This drug is America's answer to the opioid crisis. I was prescribed this drug off label for another condition. It's the price that has me scratching my head. It's been the same price for too long. Other pharmacy's price it higher.)

I won't get started on the drugs (new--not genetic) prescribed for depression. And then reading Irving Kirsch's research. His paper can be found, but you need to hunt for it. I'll offer this interview.

https://www.aarp.org/health/drugs-supplements/info-05-2010/d...

I am proud of Biden's promise to lower prices. I am so glad he's at the helm. I'm not being overly political. I just am just at bit hopeful now. Something I haven't been in 4 plus years.

> They have the advantage of pushing through Clinical trials without much oversight.

This isn't an advantage. What you end up with is a lack of clarity on what works well, what doesn't, and why. It makes it easy to go from A to B, a hypothesis to a drug, but it clouds what C, D, and E should be, as that lack of oversight turns into a lack of deeper insight.

To get approval in US and Europe, the trials need to be of the same quality no matter where they are run. Sometimes it may be cheaper in poorer countries because you don't have to pay your volunteers as much. You still need to check all the appropriate boxes regarding informed consent as anywhere else. And, of course, western companies are entirely capable to run trials anywhere in the world. The COVID vaccine trials were run in Europe, the US, South Africa, Israel, and really any place where the incidence was high enough.

And China and Russia are not "making big breakthroughs": just look at the vaccines again: BioNTech/Moderna/J&J/AZ all work extremely well, all things considered. The Russian and Chinese vaccines don't. Just ask/look at the charts of Chile. Or any Russian.

Am Russian, am vaccinated with Sputnik V, would do it again. Yes, the study was rushed and details were missing, but, eventually, all things got in order.

And it's a real working vaccine, effects of which I see basically every day on my friends.

Yes: unless a vaccine is harmful, it’s better to have than not. Higher effectiveness is better, of course, but if there was ever a time to say “don’t let perfect be the enemy of good”, it’s during a raging pandemic.

> it's a real working vaccine

It is better than nothing. But it’s a far cry from the best vaccines (Pfizer, Moderna, and to a lesser degree, AstraZeneca), which protect against novel variants and can produce some level of herd immunity.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com