←back to thread

1169 points jbredeche | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.306s | source
Show context
chewbacha ◴[] No.43998395[source]
Good thing RFK pushed out the official overseeing this financing and the current administration is actively defunding the organizations that produced this.

Better to have more disabled or dead babies instead of science.

/s

replies(4): >>43998405 #>>43998421 #>>43998457 #>>43999045 #
pacoWebConsult ◴[] No.43998457[source]
From a purely utilitarian perspective, funding research like this is not an effective use of dollars at the margin. How many people could we save if an equivalent amount was put into reducing obesity, smoking, and drinking? How many people could we save if we stopped spending money we don't have to do things that the government isn't competent at allocating anyways?

That's not to say the research itself is not impressive nor important, but think critically about the fact that this money doesn't exist in a vacuum.

replies(17): >>43998481 #>>43998498 #>>43998524 #>>43998537 #>>43998559 #>>43998595 #>>43998611 #>>43998619 #>>43998647 #>>43998652 #>>43998676 #>>43998690 #>>43998700 #>>43998708 #>>43998726 #>>43998777 #>>43998807 #
wat10000 ◴[] No.43998559[source]
How do you know it's not effective? The cost per life saved is extremely high now, but this stuff gets better over time. How much did penicillin cost to produce originally?
replies(2): >>43998682 #>>43998698 #
lukevp ◴[] No.43998698[source]
Isn’t penicillin just bread mold? So probably not a great example.
replies(1): >>43999004 #
1. wat10000 ◴[] No.43999004[source]
And yet, the first patient treated with mass-produced penicillin used half the total supply, and the stuff was so rare that it was extracted from patients' urine for reuse.