> purportedly in the interests of promoting innovation in the pharma space Why the purportedly? Do you have reason to believe he has any ulterior motives? I d

> purportedly in the interests of promoting innovation in the pharma space Why the purportedly? Do you have reason to believe he has any ulterior motives? I didn't know anything about this guy before this so I googled him. http://online.stanford.edu/instructors/balaji-s-srinivasan http://online.stanford.edu/instructors/balaji-s-srinivasan "the co-founder and CTO of Counsyl, a genomics startup" Ok, so he clearly has some experience as a biotech innovator. > He's described it as the big enemy for any biotech innovator to overcome. Seems reasonable. The current market in biotech and rate of innovation seems underwhelming. Would you agree? The current level of legislation in biotech seems to favor too-big-to-fail type companies? They sure seem to get away with egregious crimes. Eg: bribery [1] , knowingly selling HIV contaminated blood products , even moving such sales to Asia and Africa after it became public in the US [2] , numerous other ethical issues [3] [1] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-09-30/glaxo-to-pay-20-million-sec-fine-over-bribing-chinese-officials https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-09-30/glaxo-to-... [2] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24785997 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24785997 [3] http://ethics.harvard.edu/pharmaceutical-industry-institutional-corruption-and-public-health http://ethics.harvard.edu/pharmaceutical-industry-institutio... Seems to me the current system isn't working properly. Is there reason to believe a guy like Baraji shouldn't be allowed to try to reform it?