- Frederico Santos
This conversation is closed.
How much capital does it take to find a cure for a given disease? Would there be a reason for you to allocate your capital to this?
It’s fairly certain that great breakthroughs require great geniuses, but what’s the role of capital in all of this? I want to explore the impact of capital inflows into medical research through the creation of investment funds with the sole purpose of increasing the probability of discovery.
How much of your own capital would you give away to increase the probability of finding a cure? Truth be told, you would probably want to give more than you actually have. After all, who wouldn’t want to eradicate a disease…
But what to do when the capital I can spare to this is meaningless when compared to the big picture?
With today’s global world I believe we can be much more ambitious in how we intervene in the gathering of capital. If you look at the advancements in the “typical” capital raising and the development of crowd-funding platforms it could be relatively simple to raise large amounts of capital from small investors.
How would this differ from the usual investment fund created to research a specific drug? Besides the fact that the way we are gathering capital would be very different, the fund’s return objectives would be significantly different as well. Having the fund’s objective solely as “increasing the probability of a given disease” would make all type of research beneficial simply because the investors are not looking to research the drug that would maximize their financial returns.
On the link below I take on a more descriptive role of the reasoning behind this idea. It is still a working project and at the moment I’m more focused on the practical aspects of such a fund.
Hope this reading had made your live a bit more interesting has I’m sure your comments will make mine.