You mention that "we could be way further along in biotech if..." What do you consider this to mean, and more importantly - why? We live at a time when many be

You mention that "we could be way further along in biotech if..." What do you consider this to mean, and more importantly - why? We live at a time when many believe that if there was just enough money and work going into we could eliminate all ailments and be living to 200, if not outright headed towards a Kurzweilian future - which is seemingly radically more far off as the years pass. But I can't help but consider that this optimism is happening at the same time that we can't manage to cure the common cold. And many of the most revolutionary steps we've had in medicine happened many decades and most often by purely serendipitous happening -- and not directed and heavily funded research. For instance chemotherapy is still the front line treatment for cancer and its discovery came when a couple of doctors noticed that victims of mustard gas in the first World War had surprisingly low immune cell counts. As another example penicillin, the first and father of all antibiotics, was also discovered completely by accident. A scientist accidentally left a petri dish containing some bacteria open. It had been contaminated by some mold from a nearby window, but that mold seemed to have inhibited the bacterial expansion. Lo and behold, antibiotics emerge as a byproduct of mold on rotting decay. It took years for that discovery to be accepted even after the discovery had published and spoken about as much as he could. Probably because it's defies all intuition and is certainly not a path anybody would have ever intentionally gone down, except with hindsight. Vaccines? Similar story. Hey I noticed all these milk maids, that have caught cow pox before, are immune to small pox for some reason. Do other people become immune if exposed to cow pox? Cool, they do! By contrast, medical progress in recent decades has been extremely asymptotic. Perhaps this could be because we've only spent $x trillion instead of $x+$y trillion, but it could also mean that we are simply hitting a genuine asymptote where we'll continue to be able to make progress but will see ever smaller returns. The current era of extreme optimism is also hardly new. A couple of decades ago nanotechnology was going to be an imminent breakthrough that would cure practically anything, and even revolutionize matter itself. And genetic engineering has been creating promises since its advent. In the decades of promises there the most we really ended up with was some crops genetically engineered to resist an herbicide, which invasive herbs also naturally grew rapidly resistant to. Cas9? We can wait a few years, but I strongly suspect I'll be able to add it onto the nanotechnology pile of 'just around the corner' revolutionary breakthroughs, but they're just around the corner in the same way that the end of MC Escher's stairwells are also just around the corner.