Fbogre666

I sincerely hope this is true, and if so, CONGRATULATIONS YOU LOVE BIRDS! People always say don’t date where you work, but I say peeshaw and bahhumbug. Find love wherever you can. Life is too short to add silly restrictions.

I hope I’m not to late for this. First off thank you for doing this AMA.

My question pertains to the development of new antimicrobial therapies.

As we know the US particularly has a very capitalistic mindset when it comes to healthcare, and because of this there seems to be a running theme that it’s financially a better decision to treat a disease so that it no longer functions than it is to cure it. A good example of this is HIV and AIDS. Obviously the medications to treat those diseases are not only expensive, but are 100% required to survive. However curing the disease would be counterproductive from a fiscal perspective because a cure is “one and done.” Beyond that, due to the side effects of many of the treatment medications, it creates a secondary market for medications like antiemetics.

My question is this, given the pushback we’d likely see from pharmaceutical companies in developing a cure, do you feel like we will ever find said cure for diseases like this, and if so why?

Oh I fully understand that finding a legitimate cure for HIV would be an incredibly difficult task, I guess my question was more based around the idea that big pharma wouldn’t invest the resources required to find that cure because of how costly it would be versus the expected payout, comparing it to how we treat the disease currently effectively requiring a patient to become “hooked,” to a drug for the entirety of their lives.

Can you tell I have more than a bit of healthy distrust of the medical system?(important to note I’m a nurse and have worked in the field for a decade now, so I base a lot of my opinions around what I’ve seen, not off pure conjecture and hypotheticals)

That being said, your point makes a good amount of sense. Find the cure, charge a fee of the firstborn child to get it.