can you explain "intellectual property" to me since? (in particular as it pertains to the list of drugs they are claiming can be used to manage or treat.) thanks!...
I'm afraid this is where things get murky, because attorneys are involved.
Patent applications cannot simply claim discoveries, there must be some basis to believe applications with practical utility will result. (Though some very strange mental gymnastics may be required to make some valid patents useful for purposes other than filing lawsuits.)
Because of this you cast a very broad net when you write an application likely to be challenged. If all suggested applications fail to materialize, the patent will be denied, or be worthless. They don't know that all these treatments will work, they are simply listing those which have some likelihood of becoming useful for treatment. If any one pans out, they have priority on a patent claim with real value. Should they overlook the application which becomes most useful, the patent may be valid, but not worth much when others are ready to argue about every aspect.
Royalties on test kits for HIV run to something like $100M/year. These amounts will cause sane people taking professional legal advice to do bizarre things.