FDA approves first monthly injectable to treat HIV infection
&gt; The cost, however, is steep — the list, or wholesale, price is $3,960 a month, or more than $47,500 a year. The list price for the one-time initiation dose is $5,490.<p>Median income in the US is ~$31K apparently. So even in a rich country, this is like 50% more than the income of a typical person.<p>My understanding is the funding for the trials was partly from NIAID. This seems like yet another case where public funds are used for research, but a company ends up with the ability to dictate pricing.<p>I&#x27;m glad that this works and that there is another, more convenient and effective treatment option. But shouldn&#x27;t we have some setup where if tax dollars pay for the research, the government should own a share of the IP commensurate with their funding level, and should then be able to have some say in pricing?<p>Or, if you think that the government itself shouldn&#x27;t own IP for a product on the market, can we create an independent non-profit which receives ownership, and whose charter aligns with actually treating as many people as possible?<p>I&#x27;m not saying that when real, innovative work happens, pharmaceutical companies shouldn&#x27;t get some meaningful return on the money they put in. But when the public supports the work, we shouldn&#x27;t get nothing.