I think its sad and unfortunate that corporate America and the United States government wholly assign medical research grants and funding, according to a disease's prevalence.

Congress feels that we should only fund medical research that benefits the greatest number of people. Corporate America feels the same way. When you invest money, you want the "biggest bang for your buck." Why invest money in researching diseases that very few people get? Why should a company spend millions of dollars developing drugs and treatments for such rare diseases, when the likely profits from the selling of said drugs and treatments are likely to be very small?

It seems that the rules of Capitalism, here, are similar to the basic rules of base, majoritarian democracy.  Here, the needs or desires of the many outweigh the needs of the few or the one. Democracies throughout the world, though, have learned throughout the course of time that this is a bad policy. The rights of small religious, political, ethnic and/or religious groups are just as important as those of the majority, and when the majority wants to pass legislation in the interest of the whole, we need to be careful that we don't deny the benefits of the "Social Contract" to other, more vulnerable members of our society. 

For example, when a country is at war, it often enacts a draft. That said, there are many people who would be opposed to military service, either for religious reasons or matters of personal conscience and conviction. Hence the ability of a specific class of people to be exempt from conscription. Also, when a government (often acting on the desires of a majority) wishes to seize private property for public use, the law dictates that the owner of said land be compensated according to "fair market value." We seem to have developed, as a democracy, general political and legal rules for protecting the minority or the individual from the abuses inflicted by the majoritarian will.  

 That said, we have no such rules in the economic sphere. The economic demands of the majority may run counter to the economic requirements of the few. For example, the sicknesses that are most likely to affect Americans are cancer, heart disease, etc...As such, we invest, as a society, hundreds of millions of dollars on trying to find cures and/or treatments for these diseases. The "majority will" can often be gauged, in some ways, through market mechanisms, however imperfectly. Of course, CEOs, politicians and shareholders are imperfect beings and they interpret this "majority will" differently and imperfectly. 

That said, there are hundreds of diseases out there, called "orphan diseases" that are totally ignored by Academia, the government and corporate America, because the profits that could be gained from their exploration are marginal. Our refusal to research cures and treatment often has nothing to do with our likelihood of finding a cure or successful treatment. Indeed, sometimes the treatment can be very easily produced, but the companies don't want to pay for it, because the diseases are either rare, or because those who are afflicted with it lack the money to pay.

My wife is an academic in the sciences and she says that many scientists are fascinated by "orphan diseases" because they give us unique insights into how different diseases work, spread, operate and the like. And by researching and knowing them more in-depth, we can actually gain a greater understanding of more widespread diseases like cancer, epilepsy, ALS and the like. 

I only bring this up because I found out that one of my good friends from high school, Heather A., died this morning. She had an "orphan disease," named chiari, and had to undergo massive brain surgery to fix it. Only a few have ever been performed. At first it looked like she would do well, but she went into a coma and was declared brain dead two days ago. She passed away this morning, but not before engaging in the incredibly heroic act of donating her organs to desperately sick people in need. 

Chiari, and hundreds of diseases like it, are not getting the funding and research dollars that perhaps they should be getting. Many diseases that can be treated and possibly even cured are being ignored, simply because corporations and their government enablers don't think its profitable to do so. 

Heather A. was one of the most cheerful,wonderful people I have ever met and the world was a better place for her being here. I had many wonderful political, social and economic discussions with her, ever since we were in high school, and I shall miss her and these talks greatly. She was one of my biggest supporters, in terms of encouraging me to write and start a blog, and she was one of my blog's biggest fans. I shall miss her very, very much. 

If we can support the "will of the majority" in politics and law, while also protecting the "interests of the minority," then can we not also pursue such a policy when it comes to biomedical research and healthcare?

I think that we can. We owe it to ourselves, our friends and our families. I for one, am now wholly resolved to pursue the cause of greater research equity. It is a cause I will not give up. 

Heather A--rest in peace. You will not be forgotten.