I'm not going to pretend to know how the industry works, but fuck that yes I am. I'd imagine certain insurance companies that cover the cost of that particular drug were charged $750 per pill while those without the insurance were not. In my simplistic view, that would ultimately lead to slightly higher health insurance premiums for those companies ultimately, but no one would be deprived of the drug due to cost.

If I'm correct, I'd probably do the same thing in his situation. If I owned the only drug to treat an illness, I'd charge a lot more for those insured by a provider that covers the cost of drug. They would spread that cost thinly over all of their insured, raising everyone's premiums by fractions to cover the cost of the select people who need the drug. Anyone not covered by insurance would get it for free or for pennies. Win win in the business world. Everyone lives, and you make money. Until it goes viral and everyone demonizes it as pure greed. If it was pure greed, then why give away any of the product for free? Why charge only $750 per pill to those covered? Why not $2,000? Or $1,000,000? You're the only one allowed to sell it ffs!!

I'm sure I'm missing a lot here, but I can think of a lot worse people than Martin Shrikiklir based on my current understanding of the situation.