Since the birth of this industry, we only had increasing regulation over time.

I think there was only one time in history of biotech where we made it easier to develop an appropriate drug.

So when George Yonkopoulos started Regeneron, it cost about $10,000 per patient in trial.

That's ballooned to $500,000.

There is no law of physics that requires it to be $500,000 in terms of complexity and cost to dose a patient in a trial.

Everyone will be using AI in biotech industry five years from now.

Can it take $2.5 billion to cover with drug and make it into $500 million?

Can it make it like 4x more efficient in terms of Thailand to To answer that question, we really should go back and look where most of that money is centric now. We had this enormous wave of access. And now we're sitting on the other side of that. We have an enormous amount of EV negative public companies. There was a stretch of seven to eight months where there were no biotech IPOs.

And so I'm really excited about that sort of opportunity to make things that are just net

new in the industry. And that's where we have to go to really keep winning. The biotech paradox.

One fifth of public biotech companies are trading below their cash balances. C. Brown's had hit

record lows. The industry spends $2 billion per approved drug,

and that number keeps climbing. And yet, we're designing antibodies from scratch with AI,

we have drugs that are bending the carbon aging. The science has never been better. So why is the

business of biotech collapsing while the technology is exploding? Today's guests have spent

years studying this contradiction.

Laude Nuzana found in general control,

a startup tackling aging after writing the definitive analysis

of why there are no trillion-dollar biotechs.

Elliot Hirshberg is a partner at Amplify,

betting on the next wave of platform companies

while watching American biotech companies flee to China and Australia

...