What Does Maria Bartiromo Think About AIDS?

When I read the following parargraph from yesterday’s NY Times article about the new once-a-day AIDS pill, I shook my head. Is public health really just a market issue? Was this the most natural way for Andrew Pollack to frame the story? Was I the only person to do a double take?

The drugs in the new pill already constitute the most widely prescribed regimen in the United States, and one of the most effective. Doctors and securities analysts expect most people now taking Sustiva and Truvada separately to switch to the new pill.

You may also like...

3 Responses

  1. KipEsquire says:

    Securities analyst are in the business of knowing — better than doctors, in fact — how insurance companies, PBMs and related companies will adjust their formularies to account for developments like this.

    They also, believe it or not, have insight into how pharmaceutical companies tend to price their next-gen drugs and how such pricing ripples through NRx and TRx trends for existing drugs.

    (Don’t know what NRx and TRx are? Ask a securities analyst.)

  2. Dylan says:

    Environmentalists and securities analysts expect most people now driving internal combsution vehicles will switch to electric powered vehicles within five years.

    Isn’t that more convincing than the opinion of environmentalists, or, on the other side, auto executives? Doctors may have financial incentives to push a new drug, and are not noted experts in predicting consumer tastes; securities analysts only have incentives to predict winners, not make them, and presumably have some skill in doing so.

    I will grant that “security analysts” is both over and under specific in some ways and not a natural phrase to see in this instance. But what would be better? “Experts”? Business experts? Drug business experts?

  3. Joe says:

    Your post exemplifies why lawyers in general are poor business people. No understanding of market forces.