Is there any price too high to pay for reducing cancer 27%?

Over the last 25 years the U.S. cancer rate has been declining and over that time frame it has witnessed a 27% decline. The American Cancer Society reported in its study that there were approximately 2.6 million fewer cancer deaths since reaching a peak of 215 deaths per 100,000 people. The most recent data shows a ratio of 156 deaths per 100,000 people. The decline has come as advances in treatment have improved with drug companies spending more money on research and development. Gilead Sciences, a large company in the oncology space, spent over $4.2 billion on research and development over the last 12 reported months and Celgene, another large player in the oncology field, spent over $7.2 billion on research and development during the same time frame. Maybe some drugs are deserving of a more expensive price? There is still plenty of room for improvement and companies will need to still invest heavily in the space as the World Health Organization believes nearly 10 million people died from cancer in 2018. This is a likely reason Bristol-Myers Squibb announced its approximate $74 billion acquisition of Celgene earlier this week. Based on the fundamentals, I would avoid both of these companies due to high debt levels, but I believe there are still some other players in the field that could make for strong long term investments.

While some may complain about the cost of drugs and how much drug companies charge, is there any price too high to pay for reducing cancer by 27%? What is your opinion?

#SmartInvesting #CancerResearch #cancerawareness