1
people have died from curable diseases
since this page started loading...
💀

Problem Overview

Keywords

war-on-disease, 1-percent-treaty, medical-research, public-health, peace-dividend, decentralized-trials, dfda, dih, victory-bonds, health-economics, cost-benefit-analysis, clinical-trials, drug-development, regulatory-reform, military-spending, peace-economics, decentralized-governance, wishocracy, blockchain-governance, impact-investing

Humanity’s spectacular failure at prioritizing not dying

Humanity’s spectacular failure at prioritizing not dying

Before you can fix something, you need to understand what’s broken. In this case, what’s broken is approximately everything.

They say knowledge is power. But in this case, knowledge is mostly just depressing. Still, you need it.

Daily Numbers

Every day, 150k deaths/day humans die from disease and aging. Many of those deaths are likely eventually avoidable with sufficient investment, but we are moving far too slowly.

A scale comparison visualizing 150,000 daily deaths from aging and disease represented as fifty individual blocks of 3,000 deaths each to illustrate the ‘50 9/11s’ ratio.

A scale comparison visualizing 150,000 daily deaths from aging and disease represented as fifty individual blocks of 3,000 deaths each to illustrate the ‘50 9/11s’ ratio.

I tried to imagine what 150k deaths/day people looks like. It’s like if you took everyone in a decent-sized stadium and deleted them. Then did it again tomorrow. And the day after that. Forever. You’d run out of stadiums before you’d run out of corpses, which seems like poor urban planning.

That’s fifty 9/11s. Per day. Every day. Including weekends and holidays.

After the first 9/11, America invaded two countries and spent $2 trillion. After the fifty daily 9/11s, humanity shrugs and wonders what’s for lunch.

When one thing kills 3,000 people, it’s a tragedy and you start wars. When diseases kill 50 times that every day, it’s called “natural causes,” which is Latin for “we couldn’t be bothered”.

If aliens were studying you, they’d probably conclude you can’t count past 3,000.

Where the Money Goes

Here’s how humanity allocates its resources:

Killing each other: $2.72T per year Curing diseases: $67.5B (95% CI: $54B-$81B) per year

But the real bottleneck isn’t research funding. It’s testing which treatments actually work. Clinical trials determine whether medicines save lives or sit on shelves. On that front, governments worldwide spend $4.50B (95% CI: $3B-$6B) annually on clinical trials versus $2.72T on weapons. That’s a 604:1 (95% CI: 453:1-894:1) ratio, which in technical terms is called “having your priorities backwards.”

A comparison of global annual spending showing the massive disparity between military expenditures (2.72 trillion) and funding for disease research (67.5 billion) and clinical trials (4.5 billion).

A comparison of global annual spending showing the massive disparity between military expenditures (2.72 trillion) and funding for disease research (67.5 billion) and clinical trials (4.5 billion).

For comparison, imagine if you spent $2,700 on guns and $68 on food. Your neighbors would stage an intervention (or call the police, or possibly just move). But when humanity does it, you call it “military spending” and give everyone medals.

On the Pentagon’s Accounting

The Pentagon has lost $2.5 trillion. Not spent. Lost. Like car keys, except the car keys could cure cancer several hundred times.

A comparison showing the scale of the Pentagon’s 2.5 trillion loss against the cost of 37 years of medical research and 17 aircraft carrier strike groups.

A comparison showing the scale of the Pentagon’s 2.5 trillion loss against the cost of 37 years of medical research and 17 aircraft carrier strike groups.

When normal people lose $20, they search the couch cushions. When the Pentagon loses $2,500,000,000,000, they ask for more money and Congress says yes.

If you tried this with your taxes, they’d arrest you. When the military does it, it’s called “standard operating procedure,” which is also Latin, probably for “we’re making this up as we go.”

They say a trillion is just a number. But it’s the number of dollars you lost that could have funded medical research for thirty-seven years. Give or take a few hospitals, several cancer cures, and maybe a solution to aging (but who needs that when you have seventeen redundant aircraft carrier strike groups).

On Medical Research

Since 1970, the National Institutes of Health has spent over $1 trillion studying diseases.

A comparison of US NIH RECOVER and UK RECOVERY trials highlighting the disparity in cost per patient (55,500 vs. 500) and patient enrollment counts, alongside a breakdown of NIH budget allocation.

A comparison of US NIH RECOVER and UK RECOVERY trials highlighting the disparity in cost per patient (55,500 vs. 500) and patient enrollment counts, alongside a breakdown of NIH budget allocation.

Diseases cured: Zero.

Well, technically that’s not fair. They cured… let me check my notes… no, it’s zero.

Here’s where it gets interesting. The NIH has a $47B (95% CI: $45B-$50B) annual budget. Of that, only 3.3% (95% CI: 2%-5%) goes to actual drug trials in humans. The other 97% goes to studying mice, building buildings, training researchers, and publishing papers nobody reads.

It’s like if you spent 97% of your grocery budget on cookbooks and 3% on food, then wondered why you’re starving.

But it gets worse. The NIH RECOVER Initiative spent $1.665 billion over four years testing COVID treatments. Trials completed: zero. Cost per patient: $55,500.

Meanwhile, the UK’s RECOVERY trial spent $20M (95% CI: $15M-$25M) over six months, enrolled 48,000 patients, found multiple effective treatments, and saved over 1 million lives. Cost per patient: $500 (95% CI: $400-$2.50K).

The NIH spent 133 times more per patient to achieve infinitely less (dividing by zero is still infinity, even in government accounting).

This inefficiency has a body count. The misallocation costs approximately 100 million quality-adjusted life-years annually. That’s 7 million death-equivalents per year from choosing the wrong research instead of the right research.

Efficiency comparison between the US NIH RECOVER initiative and the UK RECOVERY trial.

Efficiency comparison between the US NIH RECOVER initiative and the UK RECOVERY trial.

The system is operating at 2% of its potential capacity to save lives.

Also, NIH funding priorities have a 0.07 correlation with actual disease burden. That’s essentially random. You could allocate the budget by throwing darts at a disease list and get better results (darts don’t have institutional overhead or grant-writing requirements).

On the FDA

The FDA is America’s way of making sure drugs are safe. They do this by making the approval process so expensive and slow that most drugs never get approved at all.

A comparison showing the massive disparity between the Oxford RECOVERY trial cost per patient (500) and the standard FDA process cost per patient (41,000), illustrating an 82x cost difference.

A comparison showing the massive disparity between the Oxford RECOVERY trial cost per patient (500) and the standard FDA process cost per patient (41,000), illustrating an 82x cost difference.

It takes 14 years (95% CI: 12 years-17 years) and $2.60B (95% CI: $1.50B-$4B) to get a drug from discovery to patient. 14 years (95% CI: 12 years-17 years). That’s longer than it took to build the pyramids, and those involved moving rocks the size of houses without machinery (also the pharaohs didn’t have to file quarterly progress reports in triplicate).

During the Oxford RECOVERY trial, they tested treatments on 40,000 patients for $500 (95% CI: $400-$2.50K) per person. The FDA’s process costs $41K (95% CI: $20K-$120K) per patient. That’s 82x (95% CI: 50x-94.1x) times more expensive for the same result, except slower. It’s like if you could get a haircut for $10 or $820, but the $820 haircut takes 14 years (95% CI: 12 years-17 years) from discovery to patient and you might be bald by then anyway.

Ninety-five percent of diseases have zero approved treatments. This is because the FDA is very good at preventing bad drugs from reaching people, and also pretty good at preventing good drugs from reaching people, and absolutely excellent at preventing any drugs from reaching people.

They say the road to hell is paved with good intentions. The FDA’s road is paved with good intentions and also 14 years (95% CI: 12 years-17 years) from discovery to patient.

On What War Costs

Humanity spends $2.72T every year on war. That works out to $340 (95% CI: $333-$347) per human on Earth for death tools.

An infographic illustrating global military spending trade-offs, showing the scale of 2.72 trillion and the ratio of one submarine costing as much as 1,000 cancer research labs.

An infographic illustrating global military spending trade-offs, showing the scale of 2.72 trillion and the ratio of one submarine costing as much as 1,000 cancer research labs.

This budget includes:

  • Nuclear bombs (13,000 of them, because 12,999 wouldn’t destroy Earth thoroughly enough)
  • Bullets (many)
  • AI murder robots (the future is here and it’s disappointing)
  • Fighter jets that cost more than hospitals
  • Submarines (one submarine = 1,000 cancer research labs)
  • Probably some kind of earthquake machine

Your personal lifetime contribution to the murder budget is $74,259. You could have bought a really nice casket instead.

The interesting thing about having 13,000 nuclear warheads is that after the first few hundred, you’re just showing off. It’s like having 13,000 fire extinguishers in your kitchen. After a while, you’re not worried about fires, you’re just collecting them.

On What Disease Costs

Disease extracts $109T (95% CI: $79.8T-$144T) from humanity annually. That’s trillion with a T, which stands for “that’s an unconscionably large number.”

This includes:

  • $8.20T (95% CI: $6.50T-$10T) on healthcare (treating symptoms because cures are bad for business)
  • $109T (95% CI: $79.8T-$144T) in economic losses (dead people are notoriously unproductive)
  • 10 million cancer deaths per year (cancer: 10 million, humanity: 0)
  • 2 billion people with chronic diseases (right now, as you read this)
  • 1 billion depressed humans (costing $5T (95% CI: $3.50T-$7T) in lost “wanting to exist”)
  • 95% of rare diseases with zero treatments (too rare to profit from, sorry)

Out of 2.40B people (95% CI: 2.00B people-2.80B people) people suffering from chronic disease right now, only 1.90M patients/year (95% CI: 1.50M patients/year-2.30M patients/year) get to participate in clinical trials annually. That’s 0.0792% (95% CI: 0.0761%-0.0819%). The other 99.8% get to suffer and wait (and fill out insurance paperwork, and argue with their insurance company about whether dying is covered under their plan).

Half of humanity would volunteer if asked. You’re turning away 99.6% of willing participants. It’s like running a restaurant but only serving 0.4% of the people who want to eat there, then wondering why everyone is so hungry.

The last disease we cured was Hepatitis C in 2014. The next cure is scheduled for 2064. Please wait patiently and try not to die in the meantime.

If disease were a country, it would be the richest country on Earth by a factor of ten. Unfortunately, disease doesn’t have a flag or an army, so nobody invades it.

On Democracy

Democracy is when everyone votes and the government does what everyone wants. At least that’s what the brochure says.

A visual comparison showing the high return on investment for concentrated lobbying groups versus the lack of policy influence for the general public.

A visual comparison showing the high return on investment for concentrated lobbying groups versus the lack of policy influence for the general public.

In reality, a Princeton study found 0% correlation between what the public wants and what policies get enacted. Zero percent. You’d get better results with a magic 8-ball.

This is because of something called “concentrated benefits versus diffuse costs.” When military contractors want $100 billion, they spend $55 million lobbying for it. That’s a 1,813% return on investment.

When you want healthcare, you have approximately zero dollars to lobby with because you spent it all on healthcare (or you’re dead, which significantly reduces your lobbying capacity - corpses have no political voice, despite making up a the largest constituency).

Lobbying is basically legal bribery, except we call it “free speech” so it sounds nicer. It’s like how “alternative facts” sounds better than “lies,” or how “enhanced interrogation” sounds better than “torture.”

On Regulatory Capture

Regulatory capture is when the people who are supposed to regulate an industry used to work for that industry and will work for that industry again after they’re done “regulating” it.

The process works like this:

  1. Work at pharmaceutical company, learn what they want
  2. Join FDA, write rules pharmaceutical company likes
  3. Return to pharmaceutical company with 400% raise
  4. Congratulations, you’ve completed the circle of life

The Pentagon has the same system, except with more explosions.

The cyclical career path illustrating regulatory capture between industry and government.

The cyclical career path illustrating regulatory capture between industry and government.

This is why the FDA’s rules mysteriously benefit large pharmaceutical companies who can afford $2.60B (95% CI: $1.50B-$4B) approval processes, and why Pentagon procurement mysteriously benefits military contractors who can afford $1,800 hammers.

On the Fixed Pie

Here’s something they don’t teach in economics class: Money isn’t real, but resources are.

A visual comparison of resource allocation showing the salary gap between military and medical research roles alongside a GDP comparison between Switzerland and the United States.

A visual comparison of resource allocation showing the salary gap between military and medical research roles alongside a GDP comparison between Switzerland and the United States.

Earth has 8 billion human brains. You can’t print more brains. When the government prints money for military contractors, those contractors buy the smartest people. Every MIT graduate building missiles is not curing cancer.

Medical research funding has increased 10X in dollars but decreased as a percentage of GDP. This is because you’re printing money for weapons faster than you’re printing money for cures.

The brain drain is real: Raytheon pays $150,000 to design bombs, the NIH pays $55,000 to cure diseases. Guess where the geniuses go.

Switzerland spends 0.7% of GDP on military and has $93K GDP per capita. America spends 3.5% on military and has $76,000 GDP per capita.

The solution isn’t to print more money for medical research. The solution is to change the ratio. Take money from the killing budget, give it to the not-dying budget. This is called “arithmetic,” which is apparently a controversial field of mathematics.

On Your Personal Situation

While you’ve been reading this, approximately 8 people have died from disease and aging. Many of those deaths are likely eventually avoidable. By the end of this chapter, it’ll be 15.

A conceptual infographic illustrating the various forms of biological decay, from telomere shortening to joint wear, that contribute to the overall process of human entropy.

A conceptual infographic illustrating the various forms of biological decay, from telomere shortening to joint wear, that contribute to the overall process of human entropy.

Your body is currently:

  • Growing cancer cells (slowly, hopefully)
  • Forgetting memories (where did you park?)
  • Wearing out joints (that knee isn’t getting better)
  • Shortening telomeres (your cellular countdown clock)
  • Accumulating damage (entropy is undefeated)

You are literally falling apart at the molecular level. Every moment you exist, you’re dying slightly. It’s like being a sandcastle at high tide, except slower and with more paperwork.

The technology to fix most of this exists. It’s just busy building fighter jets instead.

What This Means

To summarize:

  • 150k deaths/day humans die daily from disease and aging, many of which are eventually avoidable
  • $2.72T spent annually on weapons
  • $67.5B (95% CI: $54B-$81B) spent annually on curing all diseases combined
  • 604:1 (95% CI: 453:1-894:1) weapons-to-clinical-trials spending ratio (the bottleneck isn’t research. It’s testing which medicines work.)
  • Zero diseases cured in 50 years
  • $2.5 trillion lost by Pentagon (whoops)
  • 0% correlation between public preferences and policy
  • You are dying while reading this

If this seems bad, that’s because you’re paying attention.

A visual comparison of global resource allocation showing the 2.72 trillion spent on weapons versus the 67.5 billion spent on curing diseases, highlighting the 604:1 spending ratio.

A visual comparison of global resource allocation showing the 2.72 trillion spent on weapons versus the 67.5 billion spent on curing diseases, highlighting the 604:1 spending ratio.

The good news is you’re going to fix it.

The bad news is it requires doing things.

The weird news is you’ll get rich doing it.

They say every problem is an opportunity in disguise. In this case, the opportunity is disguised as 150,000 corpses per day, which is admittedly not the most encouraging disguise, but you work with what you have.

What’s Next

Now that you understand the problem, which is to say, now that you’re appropriately horrified, here’s how to fix it.

A conceptual map linking institutional failures (such as NIH spending, FDA cost inflation, and regulatory capture) to their ultimate impact on individual health and societal waste.

A conceptual map linking institutional failures (such as NIH spending, FDA cost inflation, and regulatory capture) to their ultimate impact on individual health and societal waste.

The following chapters will explain:

  • Why the NIH spent $1 trillion curing nothing
  • How the FDA makes medicine 82x (95% CI: 50x-94.1x) more expensive than necessary
  • Why democracy is mostly theater
  • How regulatory capture ensures nothing improves
  • What you’re going to do about it

But first, you need to understand each problem in detail. Not because understanding is fun (it isn’t), but because you can’t fix what you don’t understand.

And if you don’t fix it, you’re going to die from something that could likely have been eventually avoidable while the Pentagon loses another trillion dollars in their couch cushions.