If you dive into the current corporate capture of the United States standard care model (which includes insurance companies and what is covered), you will likely find that you won’t be able to achieve your goal. Simply put, the economic and funding models are not there to enable the scientific research and then the lobbying that would enable you to get a $400-600 device covered by insurance that could last for decades that supports you with many health conditions. Instead, Dr. Bob Dennis allows us to buy directly at the approximate price range and we can do n=1 experiments to share our findings just as you have done with your friend (which is awesome btw - very happy for them).
Here is a nice ChatGPT o3 explanation of one of the reasons why the emphasis is not on basic science and broader medical research (which would be necessary to fund scientists like Dr. Bob Dennis to create a device to measure ion flow along the cell membrane and then to elucidate the mechanism of action):
The Bayh-Dole Act of 1980 fundamentally changed how the NIH and other federally funded research institutions operated, particularly in relation to patents and commercialization of scientific discoveries.
How the Bayh-Dole Act Shifted NIH Priorities:
- Allowed NIH and Universities to Patent Federally Funded Research
- Before Bayh-Dole, inventions resulting from federally funded research were considered public domain, meaning private companies could not exclusively license them.
- After the Act, universities and research institutions, including NIH, could patent their discoveries and license them to private companies.
- Shift from Pure Scientific Discovery to Commercialization & Drug Development
- The Act encouraged partnerships between the NIH, universities, and pharmaceutical companies, leading to a stronger emphasis on translational research rather than purely theoretical or exploratory science.
- NIH became more focused on drug development, particularly in areas like biotechnology and pharmacology, because those fields had the highest commercial potential.
- Incentivized Pharmaceutical Industry Collaboration
- By securing patents, NIH and academic researchers could now profit from licensing fees and royalties, creating financial incentives to prioritize research with commercial applications.
- This led to an increased focus on pharmaceuticals, as drug patents generate significant revenue compared to other scientific discoveries.
- Decreased Focus on Basic Science and Broader Biomedical Research
- While the NIH still funds basic science, the shift in incentives caused a gradual reallocation of resources toward projects that could result in patentable drugs or medical technologies.
- Over time, critics argue that this reduced funding for foundational biological and disease mechanism research in favor of studies with immediate commercial applications.
Impact on NIH and Scientific Research
- The Act catalyzed the biotech revolution , leading to the rise of pharmaceutical giants leveraging NIH-funded research.
- Some argue it led to an overemphasis on drug discovery at the expense of other public health priorities, such as nutrition, lifestyle medicine, and prevention strategies.
- The NIH increasingly partnered with private industry , which blurred the lines between public health research and corporate interests.
In conclusion, the Bayh-Dole Act of 1980 was the key legislation that enabled NIH to monetize patents, leading to its transformation into a pharmacology-centered institution rather than the pure scientific research hub it had been in previous decades.
