Posted on 03/27/2020 6:46:45 AM PDT by PapaBear3625
Companies working on COVID-19 treatment and prevention have seen their shares soar so far this year. Moderna (NASDAQ: MRNA) gained 44%, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals (NASDAQ: REGN) rose 15%, Gilead Sciences (NASDAQ: GILD) climbed 9%, and Inovio Pharmaceuticals (NASDAQ: INO) soared 102%.
These stocks may lose momentum if chloroquine becomes the "go-to" drug for COVID-19. As mentioned above, there is room for additional treatments, but if chloroquine gets the first-mover advantage, others that eventually enter probably will seize a smaller share of the market than hoped. The news also would burst the bubble of excitement about finding the cure or prevention for an untreatable illness. That element has lifted some of the smaller biotech companies that don't yet have products on the market -- Moderna, for example -- because an approval for COVID-19 would show their technology works in humans.
So, you might wonder, if chloroquine becomes the drug to treat COVID-19, which drugmakers will benefit? Probably none. Here's why: Chloroquine is an old drug, first approved in the 1940s for malaria, and today, there are many drugmakers that produce it or hydroxychloroquine -- too many to make it a best-seller for any one company.
(Excerpt) Read more at nasdaq.com ...
I have been a conspirator on this forum for over 20 years and I tell you, it’s a conspiracy!
Preppers could probably make HCQ in their basement. It would truly be a Godsend if this stuff works (is working). I wouldn’t cry a tear for these Pharmaceuticals and all the doctors warning us away from HCQ.
“What management in its right mind would forgo ten million dollars in profit right now, in order to risk a billion dollars to bring a drug to market years after this hysteria is over?”
An especially greedy one?
A bunch of powerful people named Biden, Clinton, Romney...
A lot easier to spell too.
>>You are correct, however what I find absolutely frightening is that multiple Governors have mandated not using the malaria drugs for COVID-19, to now include 2 Republican governors.
Does anyone have clarity on WHY?<<
I would read those orders carefully to see if they’re mainly intended to stop hoarding, but not discourage their use in CoVid-19 patients.
If they are intended to discourage use, well, if the drug turns out to be the answer, their political careers should be over at least.
“Correct me if I am wrong, but many of their replicants are defective.”
Yes there are “errors” in their replications, they what are called mutations. Some of them kill them, some end up killing us. By the way some of our replication go bad too.
.
Nor can I imagine a Governor would assume responsibility for dictating medical treatment decisions for life-threatened patients, against the judgement of the treating doctors.
The first is prima facie malpractice, the second is manslaughter at the least.
Since the real story can't possibly be this, it must be something else. I do remember reading that the order for one state, I forget which, was not intended to apply to patients who were hospitalized. Don't know if that's precisely accurate because it would make more sense to limit the drug to patients who are symptomatic and diagnosed with Wuhan, in hopes of preventing the need for hospitalization.
Ha!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.