This is one key comment that fundamentally differentiates software/hardware from biotech: "Overall the power of recombinant technology and its rapid growth in the 1970s/1990s didn’t necessarily translate into success for new technologies." Powerful abstractions and pervasive feedback loops across the hardware and software stack is what fundamentally enabled rapid innovation in tech; those same ideas haven't developed…
Founder-driven life sciences companies
11–20 of 44 posts
Re: Founder-driven life sciences companies
#12This is one key comment that fundamentally differentiates software/hardware from biotech: "Overall the power of recombinant technology and its rapid growth in the 1970s/1990s didn’t necessarily translate into success for new technologies." Powerful abstractions and pervasive feedback loops across the hardware and software stack is what fundamentally enabled rapid innovation in tech; those same ideas haven't developed…
Can you elaborate on this? Why do you think that biotech is missing abstractions and feedback loops that tech benefited from?
Re: Founder-driven life sciences companies
#13Hi. This is pretty early for this, but I’m looking for some advice for starting a seed fund to advance early-stage startups in cancer immunotherapy. It’s not for me, but someone whom I did some machine learning work, and angel investment with. He’s one of the top names in the field from the early days of cloning to today, veteran of several biotech startups, and likely recent Nobel and Lasker winner advising. There’s…
Re: Founder-driven life sciences companies
#14Hi. This is pretty early for this, but I’m looking for some advice for starting a seed fund to advance early-stage startups in cancer immunotherapy. It’s not for me, but someone whom I did some machine learning work, and angel investment with. He’s one of the top names in the field from the early days of cloning to today, veteran of several biotech startups, and likely recent Nobel and Lasker winner advising. There’s…
Link to an article on the topic: https://medium.com/bit-pharma/how-do-you-deal-with-cancer-3e...
Re: Founder-driven life sciences companies
#15This is one key comment that fundamentally differentiates software/hardware from biotech: "Overall the power of recombinant technology and its rapid growth in the 1970s/1990s didn’t necessarily translate into success for new technologies." Powerful abstractions and pervasive feedback loops across the hardware and software stack is what fundamentally enabled rapid innovation in tech; those same ideas haven't developed…
We need to clone decephalized humans. Turn off neural plate development. Downregulate genes that cause brain development. Before we get this right we can supplement it with surgical techniques to ensure the clones never have brains and never become sentient. Hook the embryos up to artificial life support that innervate heart, lungs, and replace hormonal signalling.
We could have a facility full of live, brainless monoclonal humans. We could perform research that wasn't previously possible due to ethics and invasiveness.
As a side benefit, we now have a limitless blood and organ supply for transplantation. Ideally without any antigens that react with transplant patients, guaranteeing transplant recipients never need to take quality of life-altering immunosuppressants.
If we can treat real human bodies like lab rats, we'll conquer every cancer and have a real chance of doubling human healthspan.
We have to get out of "punch card" phase biology. Unfortunately, it'll require wading out into uncomfortable new frontiers that many won't be happy to broach. This requires that you accept that there is no soul, that humans are code, and that we are now the authors.
If I ever get Elon Musk money, I'm doing this.
Re: Founder-driven life sciences companies
#16This is one key comment that fundamentally differentiates software/hardware from biotech: "Overall the power of recombinant technology and its rapid growth in the 1970s/1990s didn’t necessarily translate into success for new technologies." Powerful abstractions and pervasive feedback loops across the hardware and software stack is what fundamentally enabled rapid innovation in tech; those same ideas haven't developed…
This will change when we can spin up whole human bodies for experimentation and discard them at will. We need to clone decephalized humans. Turn off neural plate development. Downregulate genes that cause brain development. Before we get this right we can supplement it with surgical techniques to ensure the clones never have brains and never become sentient. Hook the embryos up to artificial life support that innerva…
Re: Founder-driven life sciences companies
#17Earlier quoted context omitted.
This will change when we can spin up whole human bodies for experimentation and discard them at will. We need to clone decephalized humans. Turn off neural plate development. Downregulate genes that cause brain development. Before we get this right we can supplement it with surgical techniques to ensure the clones never have brains and never become sentient. Hook the embryos up to artificial life support that innerva…
Bioethiticists will have a field day with you. Also multiple angry mobs from left, right and center.
Re: Founder-driven life sciences companies
#18This is one key comment that fundamentally differentiates software/hardware from biotech: "Overall the power of recombinant technology and its rapid growth in the 1970s/1990s didn’t necessarily translate into success for new technologies." Powerful abstractions and pervasive feedback loops across the hardware and software stack is what fundamentally enabled rapid innovation in tech; those same ideas haven't developed…
This will change when we can spin up whole human bodies for experimentation and discard them at will. We need to clone decephalized humans. Turn off neural plate development. Downregulate genes that cause brain development. Before we get this right we can supplement it with surgical techniques to ensure the clones never have brains and never become sentient. Hook the embryos up to artificial life support that innerva…
Re: Founder-driven life sciences companies
#19Hi. This is pretty early for this, but I’m looking for some advice for starting a seed fund to advance early-stage startups in cancer immunotherapy. It’s not for me, but someone whom I did some machine learning work, and angel investment with. He’s one of the top names in the field from the early days of cloning to today, veteran of several biotech startups, and likely recent Nobel and Lasker winner advising. There’s…
1) Sourcing. how many viable cancer immunotherapy startups are there
2) Due diligence how good are you at separating the wheat from the chaff
3) Competition how much seed investment are they receiving vs how much they require, it does sound like a niche market
4) Strategy what are the timeframes involved, when do you get to “realize” your investment, riding them out to IPO?, etc
5) how will you accelerate their growth, contacts, help them with their own strategy etc...
Now these factors play into the success of the fund in their interactions. Example 1 and 2 are not ideal but 3 is a situation with little competition, you might be able to get better deals more equity. Obviously a lot of domain knowledge is required but if you are able to address these 5 things satisfactorily then you might easily find money chasing you.
After that it’s just coming up with a good investment structure (ex. certain international investors seek tax sheltering), some lawyers and choosing limited partners. Shouldn’t be too hard especially given the level and recognition this gentleman should command in his industry.
Re: Founder-driven life sciences companies
#20Earlier quoted context omitted.
This will change when we can spin up whole human bodies for experimentation and discard them at will. We need to clone decephalized humans. Turn off neural plate development. Downregulate genes that cause brain development. Before we get this right we can supplement it with surgical techniques to ensure the clones never have brains and never become sentient. Hook the embryos up to artificial life support that innerva…
Bioethiticists will have a field day with you. Also multiple angry mobs from left, right and center.
Typically only people that believe in a soul or that humans "should die" take issue.
Neither of these is correct in my world view. I can understand the religious perspective, but the romantic idea that limited live spans are good is incredibly twisted.
I think people should be immortal, but that's just not feasible. The next best thing is using all of the tools around us to extend our lives as much as possible.
I'm tired of biology being so punch-card slow while the compiler is literally staring us in the face. The human is the perfect model organism for everything we want to accomplish, and I've shown that we can ethically build upon it as a platform without harming anyone. Moreover, we can farm it. Never deal with blood or organ shortages, end immunosuppressants for many people, and potentially perform purely regenerative surgeries.
A human grown in a lab without a brain is a plant. Dogs, apes, and octopuses are more human than that. Before you fight me, go take on the many acts of animal cruelty in the world.
The people that would hold this back are Luddites.
This is a faster path to curing cancer. All fifty thousand types of it.
edit: Down voters, why not argue your point instead? Because from my perspective your views are a dated death wish.