[philipallstar]

> It does seem to me that a better system would be to split out the research/development and manufacturing of pharmaceuticals into the lab development (scientists), the clinical trials (should be government funded) and the manufacturing (this could easily be done via contract).

The market is there to risk money in the world of imperfect information trying to predict what would be good to pursue. That is one of the hardest parts of the process, but it's not even made your list.

[disgruntledphd2]

Exactly. This was entirely deliberate as I (personally) believe that market signals are profoundly useless in healthcare. Like, there's no free market in life or death, nobody will quibble over cash when they're in pain so I'm not sure how a market is supposed to work.

Fundamentally, the incentives of society and private companies are misaligned with respect to healthcare. Society wants a cheap, simple treatment that basically works forever (like sterilising vaccines). However, because of how the patent system works, companies want a treatment that is recurring, and can easily be patented multiple times.

Because of this, so much money goes into lifestyle treatments for the rich world, and not enough into re-using things that can't be patented. I think this is a giant waste of resources, hence my suggestions above.