5 ms·

I understand that journalists often create a simplified straw-man to contrast to a new and innovative upstart, however as someone who once served as an industry

by mswen 11y ago

I understand that journalists often create a simplified straw-man to contrast to a new and innovative upstart, however as someone who once served as an industry analyst at the intersection of life science discovery and technical computing this article's characterization of how big pharma approach drug discovery seems almost cartoon like in its stereotyping of the discovery and development process at big pharma. Can you point us to a link that has a more substantive discussion of the approach that you are taking?

alicexzhang 11y ago
Hi there - thanks for the interest! For a more technical dissection of some of the genomics approaches we employ to identify neurodegenerative disease targets, check out these reviews: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v461/n7266/full/nature08537.html http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v461/n7266/full/nature0... http://www.nature.com/nrg/journal/v16/n8/pdf/nrg3934.pdf http://www.nature.com/nrg/journal/v16/n8/pdf/nrg3934.pdf
- mswen 11y ago
  I don't currently have access to those publications and not willing to pay just to read these articles but from the titles, abstracts and citations it sounds like basically you are taking a systems biology and GWAS approach? The Institute for Systems Biology has been around since 2000. I remember interviewing people in an internal systems biology group at one of the largest pharma companies in the world in 2004 and writing about their work. Admittedly, they were a small unit intended to drive innovation within discovery at that pharma. By 2007 it had been at least tried in most major pharma companies and John Russell was writing about the Awkward Adolescence of Systems Biology. http://www.bio-itworld.com/issues/2007/sept/cover-story/ http://www.bio-itworld.com/issues/2007/sept/cover-story/ Even if your characterization that large pharma prefer a different approach is mostly accurate it is a substantial disservice to the intelligence and hard work of hundreds of scientists who have worked on applying systems biology to the study of disease and treatments. Maybe I am over-reacting to this article and your video ...but from 2000 to 2004 I heard so many biotech and related software executives tell me that their company was going to solve these same discovery and development problems. Most faded into oblivion, others found a useful niche and a few got targets identified and development started and were acquired by a large pharma to bring them to market. I sincerely hope that you have discovered a new approach to system biology that will in fact provide breakthroughs. If you have something great let it stand on its own merits; there is no need to misrepresent the hard work and investments of other scientists or the companies they work for.
  - chuie 11y ago
    Keep in mind that this article was not written by the founders of Verge Genomics, but by a journalist who "writes about internet culture, social networks, and consumer-facing technology." So they are probably going to use speech that will make the more science/biotech literate person bristle.
    - DanBC 11y ago
      Does YC provide advice to tech companies about communicating complex ideas to not so technical writers and a non technical audience?
      - chenja 11y ago
        YC doesn't provide advice about this in a systematic way, but we have been trying to learn how to engage the lay public mostly from talking to other YC founders. It's hard to communicate the exact details that we want to share, but I hope that the spirit of our ideas comes across clearly.
    - mswen 11y ago
      That was my first thought - my other comment put the initial onus on the journalist for creating a strawman opponent. However, when writing my second comment with a little history of systems biology - including within large pharma - I thought I should go watch the video. The founders basically say the same kind of stuff in their video. So we cannot blame it all on the journalist.
      - chuie 11y ago
        Ahh, I should have watched the video before I had the knee-jerk reaction to be so charitable. They could have just done what grad students are basically trained to do: use your narrow expertise to bullshit people and tie in some buzzwords that grant funding agencies like to hear. I hope I am just being cynical and that YC knows what they are doing here.
        11y ago
dragonwriter 11y ago
> I understand that journalists often create a simplified straw-man to contrast to a new and innovative upstart, however as someone who once served as an industry analyst at the intersection of life science discovery and technical computing this article's characterization of how big pharma approach drug discovery seems almost cartoon like in its stereotyping of the discovery and development process at big pharma. Journalists often don't create the simplified strawmen, the PR staff writing the press releases for the firm that they are covering do that for them.

by mswen 11y ago

alicexzhang 11y ago

Hi there - thanks for the interest! For a more technical dissection of some of the genomics approaches we employ to identify neurodegenerative disease targets, check out these reviews: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v461/n7266/full/nature08537.html http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v461/n7266/full/nature0... http://www.nature.com/nrg/journal/v16/n8/pdf/nrg3934.pdf http://www.nature.com/nrg/journal/v16/n8/pdf/nrg3934.pdf

mswen 11y ago
I don't currently have access to those publications and not willing to pay just to read these articles but from the titles, abstracts and citations it sounds like basically you are taking a systems biology and GWAS approach? The Institute for Systems Biology has been around since 2000. I remember interviewing people in an internal systems biology group at one of the largest pharma companies in the world in 2004 and writing about their work. Admittedly, they were a small unit intended to drive innovation within discovery at that pharma. By 2007 it had been at least tried in most major pharma companies and John Russell was writing about the Awkward Adolescence of Systems Biology. http://www.bio-itworld.com/issues/2007/sept/cover-story/ http://www.bio-itworld.com/issues/2007/sept/cover-story/ Even if your characterization that large pharma prefer a different approach is mostly accurate it is a substantial disservice to the intelligence and hard work of hundreds of scientists who have worked on applying systems biology to the study of disease and treatments. Maybe I am over-reacting to this article and your video ...but from 2000 to 2004 I heard so many biotech and related software executives tell me that their company was going to solve these same discovery and development problems. Most faded into oblivion, others found a useful niche and a few got targets identified and development started and were acquired by a large pharma to bring them to market. I sincerely hope that you have discovered a new approach to system biology that will in fact provide breakthroughs. If you have something great let it stand on its own merits; there is no need to misrepresent the hard work and investments of other scientists or the companies they work for.
- chuie 11y ago
  Keep in mind that this article was not written by the founders of Verge Genomics, but by a journalist who "writes about internet culture, social networks, and consumer-facing technology." So they are probably going to use speech that will make the more science/biotech literate person bristle.
  - DanBC 11y ago
    Does YC provide advice to tech companies about communicating complex ideas to not so technical writers and a non technical audience?
    - chenja 11y ago
      YC doesn't provide advice about this in a systematic way, but we have been trying to learn how to engage the lay public mostly from talking to other YC founders. It's hard to communicate the exact details that we want to share, but I hope that the spirit of our ideas comes across clearly.
  - mswen 11y ago
    That was my first thought - my other comment put the initial onus on the journalist for creating a strawman opponent. However, when writing my second comment with a little history of systems biology - including within large pharma - I thought I should go watch the video. The founders basically say the same kind of stuff in their video. So we cannot blame it all on the journalist.
    - chuie 11y ago
      Ahh, I should have watched the video before I had the knee-jerk reaction to be so charitable. They could have just done what grad students are basically trained to do: use your narrow expertise to bullshit people and tie in some buzzwords that grant funding agencies like to hear. I hope I am just being cynical and that YC knows what they are doing here.
      - 11y ago

dragonwriter 11y ago

> I understand that journalists often create a simplified straw-man to contrast to a new and innovative upstart, however as someone who once served as an industry analyst at the intersection of life science discovery and technical computing this article's characterization of how big pharma approach drug discovery seems almost cartoon like in its stereotyping of the discovery and development process at big pharma. Journalists often don't create the simplified strawmen, the PR staff writing the press releases for the firm that they are covering do that for them.