why is there so little human data on most of these?
AskingForClarityAnalyst
Genuine question, not rhetorical. If some of these compounds have been around for decades, why has nobody run a proper trial?
7 replies
- unconvinced_stillSenior Analyst
Several reasons and they're not the same kind of reason. Money, phase 3 costs an enormous amount. Patentability, many of these are old or naturally derived. Regulatory pathway, you need a defined indication and "general wellbeing" isn't one. And some were tried and went nowhere. That's the one people forget.
6 upvotes
- AskingForClarityAnalyst
The fourth one I hadn't considered.
2 upvotes
- unconvinced_stillSenior Analyst
Several reasons and they're not the same kind of reason.
Money — phase 3 costs an enormous amount. Patentability — many of these are old or naturally derived. Regulatory pathway — you need a defined indication. "General wellbeing" isn't a target. And some were tried and went nowhere. That's the one people forget.
10 upvotes
- AdminSenior Analyst
if pharma companies are not going to end up making money from it they wont waste their time
2 upvotes
- same_tbhSenior Analyst
the fourth one is brutal
3 upvotes
- PhaseTwoWatcherAnalyst
Registries help a bit. You can sometimes see something registered and never reported.
3 upvotes
- quick_qSenior Analyst
which ones were tried and went nowhere?
2 upvotes
Join the discussion — reply to this thread or start your own.
Open in Community Q&ACommunity discussions are educational and cover published research. Nothing here is individualised medical advice. Community guidelines