Why Academic Drug Discovery Makes Sense CONTRARY TO THE OPINIONS EXPRESSED BY

search and drug development ” (19 May, p. 997), we strongly believe that investing in academic drug discovery makes good finan-cial and scientific sense. Erickson presents alarming data on the rising costs and dwindling efficiency of the industrial drug discovery process as a main impediment to academic drug discovery. We believe that these costs are largely associ-ated with failed paradigms (1) and with marketing costs hidden under the guise of pre- and postmarketing trials (2). More-over, because “big pharma ” is solely profit-driven, there is no willingness to reinvigo-rate cheaper off-patent versions of approved medications for common diseases or to in-vent new drugs for the neglected diseases of developing-world countries (3). Indeed, because of these failed para-digms, big pharma is dependent on universi-ties and small biotechnology companies to fill the drug pipeline. NIH and several non-profit foundations (e.g., Stanley Foundation, High Q Foundation, and Gates Foundation) have made substantial resources available to move compounds along in the drug develop-ment process. What is missing at the academic level is a network of medicinal chemists who can prime examples of critical missions we must embrace at the national level. Where is our national leadership when the country needs a new mission that will ensure not only our security or health, but also our continued leadership in science and technology