The War on Bacteria
A New Cure for Superbug MRSA
show comments
  • Thirdsyphon

    From a business perspective, part of the problem with antibiotics is that they’re designed to be used to cure (not manage) conditions, and to do so over a very short period of time. That limits the revenue stream that can be derived from them, and as the cost of discovering new antibiotics ramps up, it makes it commercially unprofitable for pharmaceutical companies to work on them. If in the future we should find ourselves living in a world where people are regularly dying from infectious diseases that new antibiotics could cure, the financial equation will tip. . . but it’s a dumb-as-dirt civilization that just sits on its thumbs and waits for that horrible day to arrive. This could be a case for government intervention to correct a market failure. . . and Megan McCardle’s skepticism notwithstanding, we ought to remember that Kennedy’s lofty idealism actually did get America to the moon.

    • Bruce

      This isn’t a market failure. It’s a government failure. The cost of getting a new drug through the regulatory pipeline now exceeds $1 billion. Regulation is a huge part of the cost of bringing new drugs to market and the regulators have overreached, causing companies to be overly conservative.

  • Andrew Allison

    The problem with antibiotics is evolution. As clearly demonstrated by the history of this fight, bacteria mutate (evolve) rapidly and, as a result, whenever a new threat (antibiotic) is introduced, some mutants prove immune. The latest “cure” is simply a palliative.

© The American Interest LLC 2005-2017 About Us Masthead Submissions Advertise Customer Service
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to and affiliated sites.