Ebola Cure Doesn’t Exist Because It’s Not Lucrative
Vox notes that although 40 years has passed since the discovery of Ebola, we are still not closer to finding either a cure or a vaccine that is proven to work. The fact that we are currently dealing with its deadliest outbreak, one four times larger than the first is proof that the medical community has failed in this regard.
But the cause of this current predicament has less to do with a deficit in scientific ingenuity and a lot more with the identity of Ebola’s main victims.
All Ebola outbreaks have happened in Africa, because the species of fruit bats that transmit the virus to humans is endemic to that continent. The countries where Ebola is seen also happen to be some of the poorest on the planet, with correspondingly low per capita spending on healthcare. Adding the fact that all those who died in the current outbreak have been African nationals, it’s clear that Ebola is seen as a poor, developing-nations’ disease - and therefore not a priority for pharmaceutical research.
Most research and development in medicine is privately funded with one obvious main focus - to make money. They accomplish that by marketing patented products to people who are willing and able to pay high prices for them. So it should be no surprise that drug companies would rather put more money into fighting baldness and erectile dysfunction than keeping the world’s poorest alive.
Out of 850 health products approved in the U.S. by regulators between 2000 to 2011, only 37 focused on neglected diseases. And as long as the cost of those diseases are disproportionately borne by the poor, we shouldn’t be so shocked when they threaten the lives of people Americans can actually relate to.