We're looking at around 25 million USD per child, every year I think, until that child grows old and dies from something else. Or is it 25 million USD one off. Either way, such a sum could save far more residents of Haiti or the DRC or failed asylum claimants from appalling lives.
The best outcome is one where the residents of CA or TX or wherever can voluntarily donate to those drug costs if they think those American lives are worth it. If you personally think an American child's life is worth a significant multiple of a life in DRC, you'd be mistaken imv, but you should be permitted to hand over your cash according to your belief.
In other words keep government out of it: don't rook the many for the benefit of the few, set the people free to donate to FundRareDrug CIC voluntarily if they want to.
I know bugger all about the testing regime for new medical treatments, but it seems obvious that it's main purpose is to ensure that the treatment isn't actually worse than the disease. If the treatment is going to be applied in millions of cases a year, it's arguably worth spending billions to ensure this is the case. But for diseases that affect a relatively tiny number (and where the disease itself is pretty ghastly), it looks as though a less strict process would produce a net benefit.
We're looking at around 25 million USD per child, every year I think, until that child grows old and dies from something else. Or is it 25 million USD one off. Either way, such a sum could save far more residents of Haiti or the DRC or failed asylum claimants from appalling lives.
The best outcome is one where the residents of CA or TX or wherever can voluntarily donate to those drug costs if they think those American lives are worth it. If you personally think an American child's life is worth a significant multiple of a life in DRC, you'd be mistaken imv, but you should be permitted to hand over your cash according to your belief.
In other words keep government out of it: don't rook the many for the benefit of the few, set the people free to donate to FundRareDrug CIC voluntarily if they want to.
I know bugger all about the testing regime for new medical treatments, but it seems obvious that it's main purpose is to ensure that the treatment isn't actually worse than the disease. If the treatment is going to be applied in millions of cases a year, it's arguably worth spending billions to ensure this is the case. But for diseases that affect a relatively tiny number (and where the disease itself is pretty ghastly), it looks as though a less strict process would produce a net benefit.
If we had pre birth insurance it could include the cost of testing and if dangerous genes found pre implantation genetic testing.
Just a thought I had. Of course it would probably be banned as islamaphobic.