Maybe you disagree, but I don't think infliximab or even rituximab is close to the same level of importance as things like penicillin, Thorazine, misoprostol, or oral rehydration therapy. Insulin is, and it's technically a biological, but it was pre-01962.
I listed the three antivirals I think were revolutionary rather than evolutionary (all of which were post-01962), and I did list lovastatin, which was the first statin available, and widely applicable, and therefore the revolutionary one.
Sorry about my eyes glazing over - I think you are badly underselling how important the biologicals have been in recent decades, and also how there are both revolutionary but won't be used for various reasons mostly around cost (e.g. cas9 therapies) or haven't seen the full impact for yet (car-t therapies, which are wiping out the liquid cancers that the other biologicals didn't get)
kragen|5 months ago
Maybe you disagree, but I don't think infliximab or even rituximab is close to the same level of importance as things like penicillin, Thorazine, misoprostol, or oral rehydration therapy. Insulin is, and it's technically a biological, but it was pre-01962.
I listed the three antivirals I think were revolutionary rather than evolutionary (all of which were post-01962), and I did list lovastatin, which was the first statin available, and widely applicable, and therefore the revolutionary one.
lakhim|5 months ago