Cost of developing new drugs may be lower than industry claims: trial

Semaglutide retails for $17k USD/year in the US but costs only $60 to make. Perhaps it could be argued that the autoinjectors are "expensive", but not $17k/year and oral forms are coming online to make this item moot. In limited circumstances, excessive profits cross into the realm of price gouging and shouldn't be allowed by regulatory enforcement.

The cost of manufacturing the drug is only relevant if the drug can be discovered and proved effective by the Magic Drug Fairy.

Here in the real world, that manufacturing cost is largely irrelevant.

You say all this, while the literal title of the article you're commenting on is "The cost of developing new drugs may be far lower than industry claims".

I think this comment perfectly proves that this is relevant.

Manufacturing is quite relevant. If the actual cost of "discovered and proved effective" is far lower than claimed, then manufacturability becomes a concern. If the cost of discovery and proven effectiveness is borne by governments and universities, then the manufacturing is the only cost borne by the pharmaceutical companies.

Yeah, I was discussing this with my wife the other day. She spent about 10 minutes looking for a doodad and when she eventually found it, I was quite surprised. It took mere seconds to open that last drawer where she found it. She could have just opened it first and saved herself almost all of the 10 minutes.

It was a learning experience: always look in the place where the thing is. It saves a lot of time. Her problem was that she first checked all the places it wasn't.