All older drugs and almost every one based on manipulating substances that already exist in nature.
I'm glad somebody was able to convert pig insulin into human use. BUT. That is far different than genetically reverse engineering HUMAN insulin. And I have no doubt that even the gov't or gov't sponsored research can strike gold from time to time.
But, I question the consistency of such efforts. Simply put, when I'm gonna make a 100k in my top of the line research job - whether I find the next miracle or not - then my work is just work.
If I'm gonna make 100k regardless, and millions if I'm successful, that work, for some, is a consuming drive. I want those looking for my future cures to be sufficiently driven. And, I refuse to hold contempt for those that benefit from such work. EVEN if they benefit grandly.
And the days growing antibiotics in bedpans (PCN) and of finding new antibiotics in the sewers of Paris (how cephalosporins were found) are over, or, at least, ineffective to meet the challenge of the drug resistant fallout of our war with germs.
Many of the recent advances in drugs have come from moving away from manipulating natural substance and towards creating chemical compounds from scratch.
I'm surprised to see the same camp that wants the benefits of highly genetically advanced research such as on embryonic stem cells harken back to the days of PCN and pig insulin as an example of similar 'progress'. Yes, these were indeed 'miracle' drugs.
But there is a distinct difference between 'finding' a miracle, and creating one wholecloth. And the difference is money and motivation.