Ten billion dollars over ten years would deliver most of a list of missing life-saving health technologies, so their absence is a funding choice rather than a scientific limit.

Added to korrents 2 Feb 2024 · How quotes work · Something wrong? Tell us

Related korrents

Our reading — they may agree, disagree or merely touch the same thing. Closest first: a shared subject counts for most, then how near the wording is.

• AI will not on its own compress decades of medical progress into a few years, because the binding constraint is human data, clinical trials and regulation rather than intelligence. JTJacob Trefethen2 Aug 2025similar wording
• R&D spending varies more than tenfold across diseases for no good reason, which is where the best opportunities in science funding are. JTJacob Trefethen29 May 2025similar wording
• Not every bottleneck on medical progress is one AI can remove, and which ones will remain can be guessed at now. JTJacob Trefethen2 Aug 2025similar wording
• Some ideas are worth funding with fifty million dollars or with nothing, and never with five million, because underfunding buys you an ambiguous outcome instead of an answer. MHMax Hodak7 Aug 2026similar wording
• Health optimisation has overshot: minimising a measured risk is not worth it if the cost is not having lived. DHDavid Heinemeier Hansson26 Aug 2026similar wording

On the map

Open the map on its own page →