Comment · Wed, December 16, 2020
I am a final year medical student. Supplements I take. Feedback on my stack appreciated.
What they were answering
tallr0b · 2 points
I agree and I would add that there seems to be a very political “not invented here” aspect to the FDA’s failure to approve any of the Noots discovered by the Russians. The Soviet Union had a giant government supported research program into supplements from the 1960’s to the 1990’s. They discovered all of the simple, safe, effective Noots. They had great success giving them to their athletes and their chess players. Piracetam was licensed to UCB and got worldwide distribution until the patent ran out. The other racetams could not be patented in the west, and thus got zero interest from the western pharmaceutical industry. It was only when Americans with epilepsy discovered Piracetam that “Levitiracetam” was “discovered”, patented and made available in 2000. It’s even worse than that — in 2015 a study accidentally discovered that Levitiracetam helps the elderly hold back Alzheimer’s. But, since that patent has also run out, it is also getting zero interest from big pharma. I give various racetams to my elderly parents. They work like magic. People really should be outraged that they aren’t studied on a much bigger scale.
u/MisterYouAreSoDumb
I agree and I would add that there seems to be a very political “not invented here” aspect to the FDA’s failure to approve any of the Noots discovered by the Russians.
Most people just don't realize how FDA approvals work in the US. They are sponsored by private companies, and funded by said companies. Drug approvals in the US are strictly for the treatment of diseases, and companies will only pay to fund studies if they have a VERY defensible patent. If a compound is not novel, and a company cannot have exclusive patent rights to it for as long as possible, they won't even try to approve it. It costs an average of $2 billion to get a drug through trials and approved these days. TWO BILLION DOLLARS. No company is going to pay that unless they are sure they will have exclusive rights to sell it for a long time. The issue is that the patent system in the US is very convoluted to determine novelty. If a compound is discussed in any scientific paper, in any language, before a patent is filed, then you can lose your novelty claim. This means that pharma companies are extremely selective about which drugs they try to approve. If they can't have novelty, they won't even try. Imagine spending $2 billion to approve a drug, then having your patent invalidated because some random paper in Romania discussed that compound in passing in 1976... It's happened before, and people have lost lots of money because of it, so now shit moves slowly.
We need to completely overhaul our intellectual property system in the US. It's not suited for advancement and the betterment of humanity. We also need to revamp our process surrounding natural supplements. Right now I can't even link people valid research on any supplements we sell if it discusses a disease. If we do, we will get sued for attempting to position it as a drug. Doesn't matter that the science is valid. Doesn't matter that we are not marketing it as a drug. Merely linking to research discussing diseases can be used as a justification for a drug claim. It's nuts. It has to change, but I am not holding my breath. There is too much money behind how the system currently is.