explodingHeart
Member
Big pharma is my god.
Without them we'd never have GLPs, testosterone, ibuprofen, antibiotics, BP meds.
All my relatives would be dead 100 times over.
MESO-Rx
Anabolic Steroids
Ancestry results and tailored diets/training/etc…
- Thread starter Country Club Hero
- Start date
Big pharma is my god.
Without them we'd never have GLPs, testosterone, ibuprofen, antibiotics, BP meds.
All my relatives would be dead 100 times over.
Cheburek1
New Member
Sounds like bunch of made up BS and nothing else. We will never discover anything close to it. OP should watch less futuristic movies. Btw you know if you have good genetics or not from like 16 years old and there is not much you can change only adjust and fake it in extreme ways like fat girls do with insane and crazy surgeries. We do with steroids.
explodingHeart
Member
Kinda, sorta. Depends. Some SNPs are so bad that you're almost guaranteed to have massive problems down the line. Ex: The alzheimer's genes.
Every roid user should test for apoe4, the clotting genes, hole in heart syndrome, the ones that make you accrue massive amounts of iron, etc.
My genes are good on paper. In reality I'm a shitty athlete with a trash physique. Oh well.
Last edited:
Ghoul
Member
They're already pulling back R&D money.
They see the writing on the wall and recalculating risk.
"Nice small molecule biologic miracle drug you've got there...shame if you charge more than we think is fair during your patent lockup period and we have to tax you into oblivion to teach you a lesson..."
A minute ago we were in a "Golden Age" with an incredible amount of progress being made against many diseases
In just 2 years research and the new drug pipeline is slowing to a trickle as investors no longer see the risk worth it.
Like Senator Sanders said, it only costs $1 a dose to manufacture Wegovy or Zepbound, why should the developers be allowed to charge more than $2? Don't give us this BS about decades of development and risk, QSC and the like will surely step in fill the void of new drug design.
egruberman
Member
These services don't provide sufficient information to alter the diet in any meaningful way. For myself, they looked for mutations in the following genes which can lead to an increased risk of cancer:
APC, ATM, BAP1, BARD1, BMPR1A, BRCA1, BRCA2, BRIP1, CDH1, CDK4, CDKN2A (p14ARF), CDKN2A (p16INK4a), CHEK2, EPCAM, GREM1, MITF, MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, MUTYH, NBN, PALB2, PMS2, POLD1, POLE, PTEN, RAD51C, RAD51D, SMAD4, STK11, TP53
No mutations were found. For cardiovascular health, they looked for mutations in the following genes:
ACTA2, ACTC1, APOB, COL3A1, DSC2, DSG2, DSP, FBN1, GLA, KCNH2, KCNQ1, LDLR, LMNA, MYBPC3, MYH11, MYH7, MYL2, MYL3, PCSK9, PKP2, PRKAG2, RYR2, SCN5A, SMAD3, TGFBR1, TGFBR2, TMEM43, TNNI3, TNNT2, TPM1
Again, no mutations were found, but as @UncleBuns pointed out above, he did something similar and gained some new insight into the risk he faced.
Finally, as we already covered, they analyzed other genes for how compounds are metabolized and I got these results:
None of that has any relationship to diet.
Makes u wonder if i did these tests say monthly for a bit if anything would actually show as changed, a lot like vitamin testing…
Can u give any tests specifically that would cover the
Hole in heart syndrome or accruing iron? Apoe4… not sure ive heard of that one tbh
egruberman
Member
I doubt your DNA are going to change over time.
The results I posted above, as I mentioned were from Color. A few other services were mentioned which are similar. They analyze the DNA for a few well known genes.
Presently, I'm looking at service from Nebula Genomics that does complete sequencing. I think I'm going to give it a whirl.
Last edited:
Well IF they are actually testing true dna… i mean… dna from ur saliva… after eatin a ton of punanny…
egruberman
Member
Fuck it, I did it:
If it's actually useful, I'll share the results.
If it's actually useful, I'll share the results.
Who did u go thru? I have my 23andme results so i want to go thru the food one so they can tell me what they think i should and shouldnt eat just to see
Insurance companies will find ways to avoid payouts...
Dayum never thought of that… super soldiers are real as well… with this dna archive we can make em…
Intrepid
New Member
You just love spewing bs. The sad part is I think you actually believe the bs you spew to be true
Let's take the 2 largest pharma companies by market share:
Eli Lilly - up 63.52% in 1 year ; up 696.47% in 5 years
They INCREASED their R&D expenses by 30% from 2022 to 2023 according to their annual 10-k report. Obviously the annual financuals for 2024 haven't been released yet
Novo nordisk - up 37.70% in 1 year ; up 396.27% in 5 years
Increased their R&D costs 35% from 2022 to 2023 according to their 10k
..yeah clearly the investors no longer see the risks worth it and the company's are ramping down their R&D costs....
The amount of bs you spew is honestly incredible. You should stick to your toxic metal screening shenanigans. Its clear you have no clue what you're actually talking about
egruberman
Member
Nebula Genomics. There are a few companies that do complete 30x sequencing. They seemed both cheaper than others and more straightforward in terms of the value they offer with regard to analysis and access to the data.
Others I looked at either offer the data without much analysis or limited analysis to specific conditions. With the data, there are a host of other freely available tools one can use to analyze the data.
That article about the "Golden Age" was specific in reference to small molecules. There continues to be a great deal of progress in terms of biologics. Did you even read the article you referenced?
Regardless, capital has become more expensive and will continue to be in the coming decade vs. the last two where capital was basically free. Expect to see a regression in speculative investment which may impact pharmaceutical companies.
Ghoul
Member
Welcome. I see you got here 3 days ago.
You exhibit an uncanny amount of similarity to another recently banned user. Even the "you believe it" slur is someone else's line.
Let start with your by addressing your intellectual integrity.
Please point out anything to do with "toxic metals" that I've ever brought up.
Of course you cannot, since that's a baseless criticism of me intended to discredit perfectly valid points I've made regarding other issues of harm reduction some would rather not hear.
Thats a pattern going back nearly 2 decades here at Meso.
Similar vicious ad hominem attacks were made on those asserting .22 micron filters were a good idea before it became the norm.
There's even a published study of home brewers that observes the contrast between the majority asserting they do it for reasons of safety, vs UGLs, yet respond with hostility and rationalizations when lapses are pointed out in their methods and improvements suggested.
Your entire argument is so weak and flawed I doubt you'd find anyone swayed by it, even if only instinctively.
Quoting random financials from two uniquely successful pharma companies represents nearly nothing regarding trends.
Perhaps you should look at what affects the hundreds of companies in this industry to get a more compete picture?
Innovation in pharma is on the decline.
Costs are rising in relation to returns.
Generally the low hanging fruit was picked long ago, leaving invocation to the more complex drugs, but also the ever tightening regulatory state, along with increasingly large losses from litigation are making the risk to reward ratio less attractive.
Couple that with the recent legislation targeting "Big Pharma", and the fact pharma development generally stretches out many years, if not decades, so with that much advance planning changes are slow to manifest. Like turning a giant ship.
Yet the slowdown is manifesting, clearly observed by people smarter than you, and alarm bells have been ringing within the R&D community for over a year.
Educate yourself, and don't forget not to let your VPN drop. Meso's forum software is very good at detecting alt accounts.
The IRA Is Already Curtailing Small Molecule Drug Development. Here’s How to Reverse That.
Many promising small molecules have lost significant investment appeal as a result of lopsided incentives favoring biologics in 2022’s Inflation Reduction Act.
www.biospace.com
Clinical trial decline highlights a lack of incentives for drug manufacturers
A report published by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 2019 titled 'Drug shortages; Root Causes and Potential Solutions?' identified the lack ofincentives for manufacturers to produce less profitable drugs as one of the root causes of drug shortages.
www.clinicaltrialsarena.com
Measuring the return from pharmaceutical innovation 2024
Our latest report looks at the current state of R&D returns for 20 leading biopharma companies; how to streamline clinical trials, optimize pipeline value, and leverage AI and analytics to boost productivity and ROI.
Not Again: Why the United States Can’t Afford to Lose Its Biopharma Industry
America’s leadership in advanced-technology industries can never be taken for granted, as evidenced by its losses in telecommunications equipment, semiconductors, televisions, solar panels, and chemicals. Policymakers must recognize what went wrong in those cases to avoid a similar industrial...
And by the way. If you're genuinely a new user (*cough*), "Harm Reduction" means putting in a genuine effort to contribute, if not novel ideas, decent, respectful discussion, not simply finding a target to attack.
Last edited:
Intrepid
New Member
I expected nothing less than for you to make a false inaccurate statement, then skirt around my entire point when you were called out. typical readalot/ghoul behaviorWelcome. I see you got here 3 days ago.
You exhibit an uncanny amount of similarity to another recently banned user. Even the "you believe it" slur is someone else's line.
Let start with your by addressing your intellectual integrity.
Please point out anything to do with "toxic metals" that I've ever brought up.
Of course you cannot, since that's a baseless criticism of me intended to discredit perfectly valid points I've made regarding other issues of harm reduction some would rather not hear.
Thats a pattern going back nearly 2 decades here at Meso.
Similar vicious ad hominem attacks were made on those asserting .22 micron filters were a good idea before it became the norm.
There's even a published study of home brewers that observes the contrast between the majority asserting they do it for reasons of safety, vs UGLs, yet respond with hostility and rationalizations when lapses are pointed out in their methods and improvements suggested.
Your entire argument is so weak and flawed I doubt you'd find anyone swayed by it, even if only instinctively.
Quoting random financials from two uniquely successful pharma companies represents nearly nothing regarding trends.
Perhaps you should look at what affects the hundreds of companies in this industry to get a more compete picture?
Innovation in pharma is on the decline.
Costs are rising in relation to returns.
Generally the low hanging fruit was picked long ago, leaving invocation to the more complex drugs, but also the ever tightening regulatory state, along with increasingly large losses from litigation are making the risk to reward ratio less attractive.
Couple that with the recent legislation targeting "Big Pharma", and the fact pharma development generally stretches out many years, if not decades, so with that much advance planning changes are slow to manifest. Like turning a giant ship.
Yet the slowdown is manifesting, clearly observed by people smarter than you, and alarm bells have been ringing within the R&D community for over a year.
Educate yourself, and don't forget not to let your VPN drop. Meso's forum software is very good at detecting alt accounts.
The IRA Is Already Curtailing Small Molecule Drug Development. Here’s How to Reverse That.
Many promising small molecules have lost significant investment appeal as a result of lopsided incentives favoring biologics in 2022’s Inflation Reduction Act.
Clinical trial decline highlights a lack of incentives for drug manufacturers
A report published by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 2019 titled 'Drug shortages; Root Causes and Potential Solutions?' identified the lack ofincentives for manufacturers to produce less profitable drugs as one of the root causes of drug shortages.
Measuring the return from pharmaceutical innovation 2024
Our latest report looks at the current state of R&D returns for 20 leading biopharma companies; how to streamline clinical trials, optimize pipeline value, and leverage AI and analytics to boost productivity and ROI.www2.deloitte.com
Not Again: Why the United States Can’t Afford to Lose Its Biopharma Industry
America’s leadership in advanced-technology industries can never be taken for granted, as evidenced by its losses in telecommunications equipment, semiconductors, televisions, solar panels, and chemicals. Policymakers must recognize what went wrong in those cases to avoid a similar industrial...itif.org
And by the way. If you're genuinely a new user (*cough*), "Harm Reduction" means putting in a genuine effort to contribute, if not novel ideas, decent, respectful discussion, not simply finding a target to attack.
you stated "In just 2 years research and the new drug pipeline is slowing to a trickle as investors no longer see the risk worth it ", but if you look at the largest pharmaceutical companies by market share, the complete opposite is happening, which makes your initial point both false and inaccurate.
"Quoting random financials from two uniquely successful pharma companies represents nearly nothing regarding trends. Perhaps you should look at what affects the hundreds of companies in this industry to get a more compete picture?"
They're not random financials. They're the most recent annual financial statements of the 2 largest pharmaceutical companies at the global level. The 2 companies I referenced make up 21.63% of the GLOBAL market share just between the two of them (the global market share is 7.62 trillion, comprised of 744 companies). So for you to make an inaccurate statement in reference to the pharmaceutical industry as a whole, then backtrack, essentially saying "im not talking about the major players in the pharmaceutical sphere, only the small, failed biotech companies that reinforce my initial inaccurate statement" is laughable
But lets go a step further and look at the 3rd and 4th largest pharma companies at the global level:
3rd largest : Johnson and johnson R&D up 7.09% from 2022-2023
4th largest: Abbvie Inc R&D up 17.90% from 2022-2023
So now we're talking about 32.95% of the global market share. ALL of the companies are increasing their R&D, contrary to what you stated.
I'm not even going to respond to the rest of what you said because it has nothing to do with my reply. I think all the stimulants you take are frying your brain to the point where you're unable to put together a single cohesive thought, so you branch into multiple unrelated topics that have abolutely nothing to do with what I said, either as some kind of defensive diversion tactic, or maybe you're just a bit scatter brained.
and no, innovation in the pharmaceutical industry isn't on the decline. If you look through the annual financial statements, they literally list out EVERY product in development, as well as the stage of clinical trials they are in. What is happening in the pharmaceutical sphere is monopolys, where's the larger companies are gatekeeping the market share and creating a high barrier to entry for the smaller companies with larger costs of capital due to smaller economies of scale (resulting in lower margins for the smaller companies). This shouldn't be confused with innovation being on the decline though. All the top players are innovating heavily. Their entire business model depends on innovation, R&D, and getting drugs through clinical trials
Again, you have no idea what you're actually talking about. Stick to your sterilization bs (and if im not mistaken, people are heavily calling you out there as well in the QSC thread). Because that's all you do--you spout BS before doing any actual research, then have to resort to google searches and diversion tactics later.
Not impressed. Not even a little bit. Do better ghoul
Largest pharma companies by market cap
Up to date list of the largest pharma companies by market capitalization.
companiesmarketcap.com
Last edited:
Ghoul
Member
I expected nothing less than for you to make a false inaccurate statement, then skirt around my entire point when you were called out. typical readalot/ghoul behavior
you stated "In just 2 years research and the new drug pipeline is slowing to a trickle as investors no longer see the risk worth it ", but if you look at the largest pharmaceutical companies by market share, the complete opposite is happening, which makes your initial point both false and inaccurate.
"Quoting random financials from two uniquely successful pharma companies represents nearly nothing regarding trends. Perhaps you should look at what affects the hundreds of companies in this industry to get a more compete picture?"
They're not random financials. They're the most recent annual financial statements of the 2 largest pharmaceutical companies at the global level. The 2 companies I referenced make up 21.63% of the GLOBAL market share just between the two of them (the global market share is 7.62 trillion, comprised of 744 companies). So for you to make an inaccurate statement in reference to the pharmaceutical industry as a whole, then backtrack, essentially saying "im not talking about the major players in the pharmaceutical sphere, only the small, failed biotech companies that reinforce my initial inaccurate statement" is laughable
But lets go a step further and look at the 3rd and 4th largest pharma companies at the global level:
3rd largest : Johnson and johnson R&D up 7.09% from 2022-2023
4th largest: Abbvie Inc R&D up 17.90% from 2022-2023
So now we're talking about 32.95% of the global market share. ALL of the companies are increasing their R&D, contrary to what you stated.
I'm not even going to respond to the rest of what you said because it has nothing to do with my reply. I think all the stimulants you take are frying your brain to the point where you're unable to put together a single cohesive thought, so you branch into multiple unrelated topics that have abolutely nothing to do with what I said, either as some kind of defensive diversion tactic, or maybe you're just a bit scatter brained.
and no, innovation in the pharmaceutical industry isn't on the decline. If you look through the annual financial statements, they literally list out EVERY product in development, as well as the stage of clinical trials they are in. What is happening in the pharmaceutical sphere is monopolys, where's the larger companies are gatekeeping the market share and creating a high barrier to entry for the smaller companies with larger costs of capital due to smaller economies of scale (resulting in lower margins for the smaller companies). This shouldn't be confused with innovation being on the decline though. All the top players are innovating heavily. Their entire business model depends on innovation, R&D, and getting drugs through clinical trials
Again, you have no idea what you're actually talking about. Stick to your sterilization ideas
Largest pharma companies by market cap
Up to date list of the largest pharma companies by market capitalization.
I skirted absolutely nothing, and addressed the argument directly.
Why have you created another account to attack me?
Obviously you're no new user and fueled by enough hatred to evade MESO's ban to come back again for the primary purpose of spewing ad hominem insults and make angry but weak arguments.
What's with this furious, psychotic obsession of yours?
UncleBuns
Well-known Member
That's possible. There are many possibilities we could come up with. Personally, I just don't see reasonable negatives that are likely to occur. If insurance companies are going to use genetics to decide coverage and premiums they're just going to make it mandatory that they get a sample from you in order to even be eligible for their service. I doubt having a little fun with 23 and me would make a difference if that occurs.
As far as the paranoia about the federal government or big brother somehow utilizing this information, I just don't get those arguments. What exactly are they going to do with it? If there's a major crime they already collect DNA evidence and then use DNA information and collect samples from suspects . I guess they could collect DNA from these companies to build a bigger database, but if they're headed that direction they're just going to database everyone. If that's the direction we're going, you'll just have your DNA taken at birth and you'll be cataloged.
I definitely don't trust insurance companies or the government. We could talk for days about the negative aspects of them no problem. Maybe I'm naive or I've convinced myself. It's not a big deal because it's too late for me. They already have my DNA! I do believe that DNA will in essentially replace fingerprints in the future and all our DNA will be databased whether you use one of these services or not. If people want to get your DNA, it's not very difficult.
Similar threads
