Helix

[Spencer Pratt @spencerpratt]

Saving LA - Phase III

[Helix @TerraStrand]

@adamfeuerstein @LoriMills4CA42 @bullishbruk Adam you are wrong to say that NK cells have failed. MD Anderson based on work from Katy Rezvani has shown very good clinical data.

[Helix @TerraStrand]

@AB1001_disciple @MartinShkreli @0xMasonH He is talking about NTLA, Verve is a base editor.

[Helix @TerraStrand]

@AB1001_disciple @MartinShkreli @0xMasonH No it’s not

[Helix @TerraStrand]

@MartinShkreli @AB1001_disciple @0xMasonH I also don’t like knockouts with Cas9 double strand breaks, but base editing or epigenetic silencing are coming, with less concern. Again the point of these therapies is to get around the issue of adherence over many years.

[Helix @TerraStrand]

@MartinShkreli @AB1001_disciple @0xMasonH Where do you see that? Follow up showed persistent knockout in KLKB1 for 2-3 years

[Helix @TerraStrand]

Right now adherence in the sort term is quite high ~90% after 1-2 years. But model that out over 20 years and you end up with less than 50% still on it. A one time therapy doesn’t have that issue.
I don’t see a biological reason why a knockout doesn’t persist 20 years @MartinShkreli

[Helix @TerraStrand]

@MartinShkreli @0xMasonH Why? Most people don’t want to be on PCSK9 inhibitors or siRNAs for 20+ years if they can get the same result with a single dose.

[Helix @TerraStrand]

@MartinShkreli @bigai4you @nathanbenaich @ProfluentBio @EliLillyandCo It works in NHPs, it just takes time but it will work in humans. siRNAs also took a long time to move past the liver and now you see great data in a number of tissues in the clinic.

[Helix @TerraStrand]

@MartinShkreli @bigai4you @nathanbenaich @ProfluentBio @EliLillyandCo You can de-target the liver and get targeting with antibody conjugation. Works well already for T-cells and lung

[Helix @TerraStrand]

@BiotechPicks @EJohnWherry @elonmusk Because tax cuts stimulate growth, more jobs etc and you can make more tax revenue in the long term, all good for the middle class, including no tax on overtime, tips etc. Tariffs are meant to offset the short term loss of tax revenue. All the policies „together“ make sense.

[Helix @TerraStrand]

https://t.co/SINCMUhqj9

[Michael 英泉 Eisen @mbeisen]

The indiscriminate and ill-conceived slashing of indirects by the @NIH yesterday must be amended if want to restore America’s leadership role biomedical research. 15% simply isn’t enough for institutions to provide the basic infrastructure needed to run a successful lab. I say this as someone who has been and remains deeply critical of the NIH, its funding system and of the ways universities are structured and spend money. We would all benefit from a genuine reexamination of how and to what @NIH funds are allocated, and I remain optimistic that once the dust settles and new NIH leadership is in place that this is what will happen and this hack job by people who don’t understand or care about research will be forgotten.

And I’m sorry but I can’t help but laugh at the people who are demanding a full-throated defense of the current indirect levels. Nearly every PI I’ve known for my entire career has complained about excessive indirect rates. This is mostly because, despite their importance, even most PIs haven’t bothered to actually understand them, and because they don’t FEEL that universities are actually spending the money to support their research. Whether they are or not nobody really knows because in the typically Byzantine maze of university budgets it’s often very hard to figure out.

There are also lots of actual shenanigans that go on especially at places with the highest indirect rates to use funds to build out the institution and increase its power rather than to directly support funded research projects. And anyone who says administrative bloat at universities isn’t real and partially fueled by indirects is either blind or part of the bloat.

So let’s get organized to have an actual constructive response to this firebomb. Scientists need to advocate for what is best for research - and we have to do it ourselves because the institutions that claim to represent us - universities and scientific societies in particular - have their own goals that often do not align with ours.

We also have to remember that grants are not an entitlement. We are not owed anything. If we want to continue benefiting from the public support we have always enjoyed, we have to show the public and their representatives - even ones we might not always agree with - that we’re spending their money wisely.

[Helix @TerraStrand]

https://t.co/vnqgTnktHM

[Helix @TerraStrand]

https://t.co/kVmfncZDSd

[Helix @TerraStrand]

Survival across stages for cancer subtypes

[Helix @TerraStrand]

https://t.co/NxCcZMrfVs

[Helix @TerraStrand]

https://t.co/yxllQLRndJ

[Helix @TerraStrand]

https://t.co/uf9HYesyb1