Where Are All the Trillion Dollar Biotechs?
Posted4 months agoActive4 months ago
ladanuzhna.xyzSciencestory
calmmixed
Debate
60/100
BiotechPharmaceuticalsInnovation
Key topics
Biotech
Pharmaceuticals
Innovation
The article 'Where are all the trillion dollar biotechs?' sparks a discussion on the challenges and limitations of the biotech industry, including regulatory barriers, IP laws, and the difficulty of creating a durable competitive moat.
Snapshot generated from the HN discussion
Discussion Activity
Light discussionFirst comment
35m
Peak period
2
8-10h
Avg / period
1.1
Key moments
- 01Story posted
Sep 1, 2025 at 2:26 AM EDT
4 months ago
Step 01 - 02First comment
Sep 1, 2025 at 3:01 AM EDT
35m after posting
Step 02 - 03Peak activity
2 comments in 8-10h
Hottest window of the conversation
Step 03 - 04Latest activity
Sep 2, 2025 at 1:11 AM EDT
4 months ago
Step 04
Generating AI Summary...
Analyzing up to 500 comments to identify key contributors and discussion patterns
ID: 45090015Type: storyLast synced: 11/20/2025, 7:45:36 PM
Want the full context?
Jump to the original sources
Read the primary article or dive into the live Hacker News thread when you're ready.
Maybe there are some fundamental limits to how much biology we can fix by putting drugs in our bodies, but I also strongly suspect we are nowhere near that limit.
We need a fundamental breakthrough in the way we do medicine (and preventive medicine). Digital twins[^1] of individuals need to become widespread, and today they aren’t even used in research settings, as far as I know. And, to be honest, this is not at all an easy feat. It is, however, something I would love to work on if I had time and resources; humans and even mice are extremely far-fetched, but perhaps hydrozoans can be cracked as a first milestone.
[^1]: https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/glossary/digital-twin/
Most drug research ends up as a money sink because investors lose patience watching scientists play whack-a-molecule.
Some drugs end up making a lot of their money for intended uses that aren't directly related to the initial research. It's easier (and cheaper) to repurpose known drugs for new indications.
Rethinking biology is a terrible pitch but it's probably the only way we will get true breakthroughs that go beyond symptom cover up.
bio is still in the investigative stage in many ways, and much of what we do is treating symptoms rather than the often unknown causes of disease
there are so many processeses that are useing wildly complex chemicals (protiens, enzymes, etc) in miniscule quantites, that are used up in there incredibly brief existances, and we can only infer them from the simple fact that something happened and things changed.
Now there is a backtracking on "junk dna", ooopsy baby. the good part is that with each thing we learn we are that little bit closer to bieng able to engineer the bio chemisry we need to achive a given goal the bad part is that it might take 100 trillion to make back the first one,as there will be no partial solution or who knows, the roseta stone for DNA/RNA could be waiting just around the corner
Further, many countries will simply ignore IP laws if a drug is successful.
We need to figure this out so that investment will be made.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanopore_sequencing