This isn't complicated. Say there are 1,000 LPLD patients in North America (a wild overestimate). Then treating them with this therapy costs us $1Bn. If we limit ourselves to health care problems, is $1Bn better spent on these 1,000 LPLD patients, or on increasing penetration of existing therapies for other conditions? It seems likely to be the latter.
To believe LPLD therapy objectively deserves the allocation you're talking about, you have to believe that there aren't other cohorts of patients that are currently underserved. But we know that isn't true.
To believe LPLD therapy objectively deserves the allocation you're talking about, you have to believe that there aren't other cohorts of patients that are currently underserved. But we know that isn't true.