> I just wish biomed paid better wages -- I much more than doubled my income by leaving a wetlab and doing advertising instead. It's a lesson in what our society really values.
This bothers me greatly.
I don't want to threadjack, but are any HN'ers aware of discussion elsewhere about what concerned members of society who do value biomed progress more strongly than most, but who don't have Milken-level money might be able to do to promote faster progress?
I'd be very interested in exploring how YC-like entrepreneurial energy could be unleashed on improving human health, and would be willing to chip in.
In short big philanthropy needs a component that looks a lot like the venture capital industry, and doesn't currently have it. Lots of smaller, big risk, potentially game changing bets rather than stultifying into safe big-budget, incremental institutional irrelevance.
In this case, for example, this research was rescued from years further of oblivion by a funding source that was willing to take a risk.
Much thinking has taken place on this. You might look at some of Aubrey de Grey's early publications on the triangular log jam for example:
Product cycle is much slower in the biomed industry and much more expensive. Potential financial gains are high, but risk is also very high. Even getting started in this industry means a hefty investment is necessary.
In short, not really suitable for a YC-like incubator.
At least not at this point.
This bothers me greatly.
I don't want to threadjack, but are any HN'ers aware of discussion elsewhere about what concerned members of society who do value biomed progress more strongly than most, but who don't have Milken-level money might be able to do to promote faster progress?
I'd be very interested in exploring how YC-like entrepreneurial energy could be unleashed on improving human health, and would be willing to chip in.