Hacker News Reader

Comment by zinodaur | Hacker News Reader

> But them’s the options.

Maybe. But I sympathize with people who recoil at the idea of "Extremely cheap life saving medication sold at unaffordable price".

Must it be sold to the world at a price that is only reasonable for the richest countries to pay?

Is there no possible regulatory system that could avoid 20 years of HIV spread and death in poor countries, while still getting the rich countries to pay their fair share?

View on HN

> Must it be sold to the world at a price that is only reasonable for the richest countries to pay? Is there no possible regulatory system that could avoid 20 years of HIV spread and death in poor countries, while still getting the rich countries to pay their fair share?

Gilead literally did that! They sold Sovaldi (a treatment for Hepatitis C) for $1000/pill in the USA and $5/pill in India. And people hated them for it.

Thats great. I guess their global distribution plan actually has a good chance of being fair after all?

The price was not paid "by a country". It was paid by a random American. Not all Americans are rich, 1000 is unaffordable for quite a lot of people.

For most rich countries, it is payed for collectively by the country because of their healthcare system.

That's great but irrelevant to the topic.

That price was paid for by an American consumer or taxpayers.

Only because Americans insist on their self-harm health insurance system. Americans are both collectively wealthy and have a very small number HIV infections per capita

Reply on news.ycombinator.com