Mariana Mazzucato Quotes

There are so few drugs for these killer diseases, but for erectile dysfunction, we have had 14 drugs since 1996… It says something about where the priorities of the pharmaceutical companies seem to lie.

To start with, pharma was an industry based on innovation, drug discovery.

The Broad research center represents the highest quality model of what Proposition 71 should be funding.

On the third stage is used for medicine, it is not known to the public.

Over the years, HIV/AIDS activists and their allies have been pioneers in creating new frontiers in the medical establishment. Through their efforts, the FDA drug approval procedures were reformed so promising new therapies could reach desperate patients quicker.

Now, what tends to happen is that the stories get hyped. And the medicines are not quite as revolutionary and as dramatic as they seem to be. But, certainly, various phases of this problem are being attacked by the pharmaceutical companies.

I keep encouraging the pharmaceutical companies to put more money into R&D.

Perhaps the most useful lesson which has come out of the work on penicillin has been the demonstration that success in this field depends on the development and coordinated use of technical methods.

It's easy to complain that pharmaceutical companies place profits over people and apparently care more about hair loss than TB. However, many in the pharmaceutical industry would be glad for the opportunity to reorient their research toward medicines that are truly needed, provided only that such research is financially sustainable.

I'd like to focus on my life on creating new medicines for people who are suffering from rare disease.

Originally, in the early eighties, the drug hypothesis was among the first which occurred to scientists.

We must continue to fight for funding for health technologies so that they can continue to do what they do best - save lives - but also because they confer a real benefit to America's economy.

Drug discovery is terribly expensive, just to find out how one drug could or could not work and all its side effects.

To develop drugs for people, we basically dismantle the system. In the lab, we look at things the size of a cell or two. We dismantle life into very small models.

The United States has an active pharmaceutical industry that has brought huge benefits to the U.S. public. Most Americans, who benefit from these advances, have little understanding of how difficult it is to create an important new medical therapy and make it available to improve public health.

All I ever promised was that I was sure I could develop a new pharmacological agent which might answer a physiological question. Any utility would be implicit in that answer.

St. Louis has always been a great center for medicine. It has been a leader in the nation since the early part of the 20th century. Along with that, we've been a leader in medical science and biomedical science and innovation in medicine.

The Republican position of prohibiting funding for embryonic stem cell research, is insanity

Efforts to approach zero risk through exhaustive pre-release testing are extremely expensive and time-consuming. New drugs are delayed in reaching those who need them, and marginal drugs may not be developed at all.

We now have the ability to explore many new treatments for many diseases. However we do not have enough money to explore them all…. I measure time by the number of patients who die each day as the result of diseases that we do not have enough money to develop cures for. We have the tools. We need the money.

If we can actually decrease the failure rate from nine out of 10 drugs failing in clinical trials and instead have seven out of 10 instead failing, that is a major victory for drug discovery and for people having better therapy.

Affordability is critical so that patients have access to medicines. At the same time, it's also important that we have the kind of incentives that allow us to do the kinds of studies that we need to do to go after these diseases like Alzheimer's.

I really was inspired by the possibility of more directly being involved in the development of drugs myself.

It's O.K. if you've got a smartphone app or a social network, and you go live with it before it's ready; people aren't going to die. But with medicine, it's different.

If drug development becomes the domain of government researchers, it's a sure bet that political lobbying will eventually trump scientific promise and commercial viability when it comes to investment decisions.