Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Biohackers take aim at big pharma’s stranglehold on insulin

freethink.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 392 posts

Re: Biohackers take aim at big pharma’s stranglehold on insulin

#341

Post by dnautics »

mkoubaa wrote: post #134
f6v wrote: post #17

As someone who had to create transgenic E.coli in a lab, I admire the effort. It’s hard to get it right, especially when trying to make bacteria produce stuff for you. However, it feels like a huge step backward. Imagine you couldn’t afford to buy a piece of bread. Instead, you need to grow your own grains and build a windmill first. Sounds ridiculous in 2021.

I agree with the sentiment but decentralizing and downscaling production is a win for resiliency. This is a good example but others include recycling and power generation have clearer benefits

> decentralizing and downscaling production

I think you are severely underestimating what it takes to produce a protein drug like insulin. Getting the bug to make it is just the first step. Then next step is purifying it. Which takes SO much water, and salts, and specialized equipment (resins, columns, high-pressure apparatus). A decentralized insulin production scheme is going to be VERY ecologically destructive.

Re: Biohackers take aim at big pharma’s stranglehold on insulin

#342

Post by dnautics »

YHK wrote: post #331
LinuxBender wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Off topic question: Is there a database maintained by BioHackers that has reverse engineered some or all of the prescription pharmaceuticals, showing not only the compounds used, but how to make, measure and test them? There are government sites that list all the chemical compounds, but details are scattered all over the place on how to make, measure and test them. Asking as a prepper that wants to stock up on food,…

The four thieves vinegar is doing something like that ( https://fourthievesvinegar.org/ ) They work also on patented molecules and try to reverse engineer proces, and then publish it. (which makes it illegal, so they are anonymous) I don't know how many molecules they published though.

IANAL, but reverse engineering process is almost certainly not illegal. Don't know where you got that idea.

If they cribbing off a "process patent" then it's not reverse engineering, though, IIRC, for most drugs companies don't bother getting a process patent because they are very difficult to enforce (to enforce such a patent, you need a warrant to go onto a competitor's premises and inspect their process, and judges are very very unlikely to issue such a warrant because if they set a low bar precedent for such actions, then basically everyone is going to start issuing spurious claims), so everyone would rather just build their moat with trade secrets than process patents. Also, I believe if you crib off of a process patent to do a one-off run or research project it is not illegal, only commercializing it is. One (ostensible) point of patents is to encourage sharing and desiloing knowledge and keep things out of the dark so that we can learn from each other.

Re: Biohackers take aim at big pharma’s stranglehold on insulin

#343

Post by YHK »

chaps wrote: post #303
YHK wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hi, I am one of the scientists working on the project. We had a lot of discussion on the project about defensive strategies to avoid any issue, since we are dealing with a massive industry. We don't have a definitive protocol yet, so this is why it is not publish. But if you want more details, I would be happy to answer your questions.

I've seen a lot of projects like yours with the purest of goals never get past this stage because, simply, nobody makes the first move. It's almost like the attention gets in the way of publication. Either that, or there was never anything there, and it was just good PR from the beginning. Your project is too damn important to let this happen. Please find or do whatever you have to do in order to publish what needs t…

I forgot to mention it, but there is also FDA requirement to how we disclose the protocol. Usually it is patented process, so we are looking to see how we should do it to not create issue for the FDA validation. Other volunteer are working on this side, not me. I am a simple biochemist, those things are two complicated for me.

Re: Biohackers take aim at big pharma’s stranglehold on insulin

#344

Post by dnautics »

dempsey wrote: post #258

Maybe Mark Cuban’s company can produce it: https://costplusdrugs.com/

They're specifically targeting small molecules, the infrastructure for proteins is different, and probably won't work with their model (subcontracting small compounding pharmacies to make the drugs)

Re: Biohackers take aim at big pharma’s stranglehold on insulin

#345

Post by erosenbe0 »

cestith wrote: post #124
hooande wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

this is very true. prices of name brand insulin need to come down, but there is a low cost option available for those that need it

Patient outcomes for the insulin aspart pens and the vials of generic insulin at Walmart are so different that many doctors refuse to prescribe the cheap stuff except as a very last resort. There's no simply substituting. These are two different brands of a generic statin pill or something. Although it's all insulin, these are very different drugs. The dosages for the same insulin in the same patient can vary, and th…

There is no substituting but also no easy comparison of how much worse the regular stuff is, since the population using R is often underinsured and unable to afford other elements of prevention and care.

Re: Biohackers take aim at big pharma’s stranglehold on insulin

#346

Post by LinuxBender »

YHK wrote: post #331
LinuxBender wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Off topic question: Is there a database maintained by BioHackers that has reverse engineered some or all of the prescription pharmaceuticals, showing not only the compounds used, but how to make, measure and test them? There are government sites that list all the chemical compounds, but details are scattered all over the place on how to make, measure and test them. Asking as a prepper that wants to stock up on food,…

The four thieves vinegar is doing something like that ( https://fourthievesvinegar.org/ ) They work also on patented molecules and try to reverse engineer proces, and then publish it. (which makes it illegal, so they are anonymous) I don't know how many molecules they published though.

Ah yes I think I've seen that site posted here before. Last I checked they didn't have a big database, but maybe I didn't dig deep enough into the site. The Download the Apothecary MicroLab Plans go to a status page that says to check back later.

Re: Biohackers take aim at big pharma’s stranglehold on insulin

#347

Post by dnautics »

bfrink wrote: post #242
deeviant wrote: post #6

I really wish this would be a higher priority for the current class of billionaire philanthropists: open source science. Medical research guided by the idea of preventing disease rather than creating expensive life-long treatments, and prioritizing the diseases that cause the most amount of suffering rather than present the best opportunity for profit. And not just medicine, but just about any industry could benefit.

You mean like this billionaire philanthropist? https://chanzuckerberg.com/science/programs-resources/open-s...

or this billionaire?

https://costplusdrugs.com/

Re: Biohackers take aim at big pharma’s stranglehold on insulin

#348

Post by refurb »

jjmarinho wrote: post #322
refurb wrote: post #300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it is the question because countries with public health systems often don’t pay for the latest generation of drugs, since they don’t feel the extra cost is worth the benefit.

It's still the wrong question to ask. We should ask what are the outcomes that these systems produce, not how new the drugs are. A cutting-edge healthcare system plagued by inequality and extreme costs can produce worse results than a more efficient healthcare system which is not as high-tech.

Well all the diabetics in this discussion are claiming they can’t do without the latest generation insulin.

But yes, I agree. Sometimes the juice isn’t worth the squeeze.

Re: Biohackers take aim at big pharma’s stranglehold on insulin

#349

Post by erosenbe0 »

myelin wrote: post #40
sparrish wrote: post #8

This is bogus. Wal-mart sells insulin for $24.88 a vial without prescription currently. It's only the newer 'guchi' insulin brands that are crazy expensive. Stuff from 1996 that is compared to in this article is actually cheaper than it was in 1996 (adjusted for inflation).

Type 1 diabetic here. Managing T1D even with the "Gucci" insulins (I use Novolog and have tried Fiasp) is still a huge pain in the butt; you have to give yourself a dose of insulin a fairly precise amount of time before eating, and accurately judge how much you're going to need, which is half science and half wild guesswork. My per-meal dosage requirements vary randomly from month to month -- a dose that would be fin…

The Regular stuff came out in '82. The Humalog variants came out in '96

The regular stuff is not really stone-age by comparison. They are both old tech.

Re: Biohackers take aim at big pharma’s stranglehold on insulin

#350

Post by YHK »

dnautics wrote: post #342
YHK wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The four thieves vinegar is doing something like that ( https://fourthievesvinegar.org/ ) They work also on patented molecules and try to reverse engineer proces, and then publish it. (which makes it illegal, so they are anonymous) I don't know how many molecules they published though.

IANAL, but reverse engineering process is almost certainly not illegal. Don't know where you got that idea. If they cribbing off a "process patent" then it's not reverse engineering, though, IIRC, for most drugs companies don't bother getting a process patent because they are very difficult to enforce (to enforce such a patent, you need a warrant to go onto a competitor's premises and inspect their process, and judge…

I will admit, I am no patent expert. To my knowledge, you can patent the process, the molecule, the use of the molecule. I don't know exactly why they are all anonymous on 4 thieves vinegar, I assume it was because of patent stuff. It might be for other reasons. I would believe that showing instruction to produce a patented molecule would be an issue. (maybe not, I don't know) For insulin, I can assure you that there are patent for processes. Quite annoying.
Post reply on HN