7 ms·

It is great that mRNA research is paying off at right time. Both Pfizer and Moderna took bets on mRNA!

ketamine__ 6y ago
Are there any mRNA startups raising a seed round?
technics256 6y ago
Technically it was the German company BioNTech, not Pfizer who did the initial mRNA research work for that their joint vaccine.
- svara 6y ago
  Not the "initial mRNA research", just the mRNA research. Pfizer contributed their experience in running clinical trials and manufacturing. The history of mRNA based pharmaceuticals is a fascinating one, Statnews have a great article on the topic: https://www.statnews.com/2020/11/10/the-story-of-mrna-how-a-once-dismissed-idea-became-a-leading-technology-in-the-covid-vaccine-race/ https://www.statnews.com/2020/11/10/the-story-of-mrna-how-a-...
- bluGill 6y ago
  This is pretty typical. The big companies tend to invest in the little ones so that if the little one finds something good they can buy it and put the rigor of large scale manufacturing (and marketing of course) around it. If the little ones fail to find anything they can cut their losses without having the moral hit of laying people off.
  - formerly_proven 6y ago
    There is (for now) an approximately zero percent chance that Biontech can be bought by either a US or Chinese company.
    - mancerayder 6y ago
      BNTX's market cap is pretty large already, it's unclear how desirable a buyout would be by a Pfizer-type company. It seems better to split profits / contracts.
    - bluGill 6y ago
      For now: Pfizer has already got what they want: a license to produce a useful vaccine. Conversely BioNTech also got what they need: someone able to run a large trail and scale up manufacturing while giving them some profit. In a few years both companies will re-evaluate their relationship. Partnerships can last for years at times. Other times one company is bought. Other times they go their own ways. All are normal and mean nothing, though if you are an investor each has different implications.
mxcrossb 6y ago
I constantly find myself wondering “what if this pandemic happened ten years ago? Twenty?”
- brianwawok 6y ago
  Decent chance people would have listened to lockdown orders better?
  - amelius 6y ago
    Yes, fake news/information wasn't a thing back then.
    - ancarda 6y ago
      Yes it was. We've had disinformation since at-least the cold war. Probably the best example is the idea that AIDS was created by the U.S. government. The New York Times made a great documentary on disinformation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tR_6dibpDfo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tR_6dibpDfo Well worth a watch IMO
      - zhobbs 6y ago
        Alexander Hamilton wrote a lot of articles published in newspapers across the country in 1793 about how to "cure" yellow fever with booze and hot baths: https://thehill.com/opinion/healthcare/486788-how-politics-infected-americas-first-epidemic-and-cost-lives https://thehill.com/opinion/healthcare/486788-how-politics-i...
      - hvdfhbj 6y ago
        Don't forget 9/11 truthers. They were at least as popular as any modern-day form of crankery, and that was nearly twenty years ago now.
      - wussboy 6y ago
        The difference is in how the disinformation is propagated. In the past media companies would self censure idiotic or untrue ideas to protect their reputations and while you could find information if you looked hard, the things would tend to spread slowly. Social media doesn’t profit from reputation but from engagement, and untruth is more engaging.

Are there any mRNA startups raising a seed round?

Technically it was the German company BioNTech, not Pfizer who did the initial mRNA research work for that their joint vaccine.

svara 6y ago
Not the "initial mRNA research", just the mRNA research. Pfizer contributed their experience in running clinical trials and manufacturing. The history of mRNA based pharmaceuticals is a fascinating one, Statnews have a great article on the topic: https://www.statnews.com/2020/11/10/the-story-of-mrna-how-a-once-dismissed-idea-became-a-leading-technology-in-the-covid-vaccine-race/ https://www.statnews.com/2020/11/10/the-story-of-mrna-how-a-...
bluGill 6y ago
This is pretty typical. The big companies tend to invest in the little ones so that if the little one finds something good they can buy it and put the rigor of large scale manufacturing (and marketing of course) around it. If the little ones fail to find anything they can cut their losses without having the moral hit of laying people off.
- formerly_proven 6y ago
  There is (for now) an approximately zero percent chance that Biontech can be bought by either a US or Chinese company.
  - mancerayder 6y ago
    BNTX's market cap is pretty large already, it's unclear how desirable a buyout would be by a Pfizer-type company. It seems better to split profits / contracts.
  - bluGill 6y ago
    For now: Pfizer has already got what they want: a license to produce a useful vaccine. Conversely BioNTech also got what they need: someone able to run a large trail and scale up manufacturing while giving them some profit. In a few years both companies will re-evaluate their relationship. Partnerships can last for years at times. Other times one company is bought. Other times they go their own ways. All are normal and mean nothing, though if you are an investor each has different implications.

mxcrossb 6y ago

I constantly find myself wondering “what if this pandemic happened ten years ago? Twenty?”

brianwawok 6y ago
Decent chance people would have listened to lockdown orders better?
- amelius 6y ago
  Yes, fake news/information wasn't a thing back then.
  - ancarda 6y ago
    Yes it was. We've had disinformation since at-least the cold war. Probably the best example is the idea that AIDS was created by the U.S. government. The New York Times made a great documentary on disinformation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tR_6dibpDfo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tR_6dibpDfo Well worth a watch IMO
    - zhobbs 6y ago
      Alexander Hamilton wrote a lot of articles published in newspapers across the country in 1793 about how to "cure" yellow fever with booze and hot baths: https://thehill.com/opinion/healthcare/486788-how-politics-infected-americas-first-epidemic-and-cost-lives https://thehill.com/opinion/healthcare/486788-how-politics-i...
    - hvdfhbj 6y ago
      Don't forget 9/11 truthers. They were at least as popular as any modern-day form of crankery, and that was nearly twenty years ago now.
    - wussboy 6y ago
      The difference is in how the disinformation is propagated. In the past media companies would self censure idiotic or untrue ideas to protect their reputations and while you could find information if you looked hard, the things would tend to spread slowly. Social media doesn’t profit from reputation but from engagement, and untruth is more engaging.