Biotech questions

I have some time left to answer any of your questions regarding the biotech industry

shoot

Immortality when?

very hard to say when or if
the problem is being approached from multiple angels, both scientific and technological, but there is very little funding available for it (which I always found somewhat strange)

it comes across as scammy at worst , far fetched at best.

whats your job, how much you earn, age

Ray Kurzweil says by 2045.

graduate student in medical biotech

if you're considering investing in a biotech company, let me know which so that I can take a look at their pipeline and see if the science makes sense

there is a lot of undetected bullshit going around

he should put his money where his mouth is.

Redpill me on biotech

although there have been some setbacks recently (looking at you, juno), I'm a strong believer in immunotherapy - definitely worth investing in

just be careful with antibody therapeutics
as I have explained here before: sometimes, for no obvious reason at all, they just fail in phase 3 trials even though they were very promising in earlier trials

Give me your take on PTN, THLD, TNXP and HTBX.

Also, how do you best maximize profit of a biotech when a phase study is around the corner? Hold throughout or..?

PTN's pipeline looks horrible.

THLD bets everything on tumor hypoxia (tumors induce abberant angiogensis, which basically means that blood vessels for the tumor are not formed correctly, resulting in regions of the tumor not getting enough nutrients and oxygen). Their main drug is supposedly only active in those regions. It's definitely an interesting idea, but does not really have a lot of potential as a stand-alone drug. But if the drug works, I can see how others would want to acquire it for use in combination therapies.

TNXP, sorry mate psychiatric illness are tricky - can't help you there. And I'm personally not really a fan of targeting receptors with small molecule drugs anyway.

HTBX, actually made me smile. I love their approach and the science is good. Just note that immunotherapy is still new and there are still some challenges to overcome. If they have any big collaborations going on (and thus more resources), its definitely worth investing in.

>Also, how do you best maximize profit of a biotech when a phase study is around the corner? Hold throughout or..?

Best way would be to have insider information ;)
Otherwise, if you really believe in the company and the science makes sense: just hold and hope for the best

How much of biotech research actually takes place solely with data on the computer? Is it possible to crowdsource this bit? What are the biggest costs in biotech research? How much does it costs to establish and maintain a standard lab? (I know that this question is wierd but please give some estimates from perhaps operations you worked at or know abou)

Believe it or not but bioinformatics can only take you so far; it's usually just for the initial screenings to find interesting compounfs that can then be studied in the lab, and of course for analyzing all the data and trying to make sense of it.

Not sure about crowdsourcing. But I can see how this can be problematic when you're trying to develop something for commercial purposes.

Depending on what kind of lab we're talking about, it's usually the lab equipment and then the researchers themselves.

Not sure and also difficult to say. It's the initial costs that are really high, maintaining it is not that bad. My guess would be at least a million to start (and that would be a pretty basic lab).

But keep in mind that there are lots of regulatory hurdles as well. You can't just order a kilogram of a certain chemical or work with a certain organism without the right paperwork.

Infinite fluid intelligence when? Accessing memory banks, learning easily, visual memory.

Cure for autism and for those stupid asians when?

Gene modification/cleansing when?

>What are the biggest costs in biotech research?
Btw, actually developing a drug, testing it, and commercialising is very expensive. Practically impossible for small biotech and pharmaceutical companies.

You know what I would make a sure-fire bet with? A medical company which is capable of putting the reproduction genitals to sleep by default and can wake them up with a simple pill, no need for surgery.
If they would also develop an easy to produce gas which can put the reproduction system to sleep then they'd be making trillions.

We always have problems with immigrants birthing too many children.
We always have the god-complex connotation in the background where every dumb irresponsible person thinks they should have offspring from their pathetic genes.
It will be a major step in quality control for future generations. Orphanages would reduce. Divorces would be a plenty without a child in the middle.
Condoms and birth pills would be obsolete.

I'd say it's one, if not the most important biological advancement humanity should focus on primarily.

but then you would not be able to have children.

Good point, we'll focus on researching people who can't have children and then reengineer a way to make handicapped people and teenagers infertile.

>Condoms and birth pills would be obsolete.

Great, then you get to cash in twice when STDs skyrocket