Chris Picardo’s Post

After a great JPM week - with amazing weather for once - we thought it was a perfect time to reflect on the state of the "TechBio" market and the companies that fall under this label. In our latest blog post, Joseph Horsman and I take on the “TechBio” label and argue it does more harm than good — while highlighting what founders can do to create lasting impact in this data-powered era of biotech innovation. Key takeaways: - AI is a tool, not a solution — success depends on how you wield it and how you position your scientists to take advantage of AI's amazing new capabilities - Proprietary, high-quality data is your ultimate competitive advantage and is the path towards novel and innovative drugs - Building a differentiated, biologically insightful, approach to drug discovery while natively integrating AI in the process will define the next decade of biotech. We don’t need new buzzwords like"TechBio" to describe this future. The companies emerging now and over the last five years are biotech built for the 21st century. At Madrona, we partner with entrepreneurs building innovative new therapeutics while using AI and data to power the next wave of biotech breakthroughs. If you're an entrepreneur building new drugs at the intersection of biotech and AI, we'd love to talk to you. https://lnkd.in/d6fDyKJh

G*d darn spot on (pardon my French)👍🏻👊🙏 Chris. Well said. Maybe inappropriate, but who cares; I’d give you a hug if I could for boldly stating this. Biotech = Bio first. TechBio = Tech first. Building pro proprietary data based on quantitative biological drivers of disease is where the nuggets are. Not the other way around. Everyone wants to cut costs doing it the other way around. It won’t work as intended.

Like
Reply
Sara A.

Founder and Principal Scientist @ Stealth Mode Biotech | Building AI-Enabled Infectious Diseases Detection Platform | Pre-seed

10mo

TechBio is what it is, tech with a sprinkle of biology, and where the tech dominates. It is clear that Tech wishes to demolish industry, and convince the world that the Tech industry should dominate every element of our lives. When it comes to biology it is often embarrassing to see the high school interpretations of biology from the Tech sector. So much of what is proposed is simplistic, unworkable and in total opposition to basic biological principles. TechBio essentially treats biology as a static object which just needs to be looked at as though it is code that contains a few bugs. There is no appreciation of the inherent redundancy that is a hallmark of biological systems. There is an old-school reliance on genetics, with Tech Bio, and so much of the work is focused on trying to identify mAbs for a host of human diseases. Apparently, TechBio did not get the memo that it is not a great idea to disrupt major signaling cascades on the basis that a screen of factors linked to psoriasis (or whatever disease) repeatedly identified a major pathway as a target. Biology is by far more complex than Tech realizes, unfortunately the desire of the Tech sector to disrupt biology, is just wasting a lot of time and money.

Dmitry Ufaev, MBA

Xelari is hybrid agentic AI that replaces long stochastic discovery cycles with deterministic molecular design in hours, scaling from single targets to the full proteome.

10mo

Great article, totally agree especially with the part about proprietary, high-quality datasets. We have, for example, been building ours for many years, which has allowed us to model de novo DNA/RNA molecules with the highest accuracy.

Like
Reply
Mauro DiNuzzo

Building Next Generation Systems Biology

10mo

The industry is full of buzzwords and, what is worse, of misused technical terminology (e.g., digital twin). VCs haven't been immune to that, to say the least. To me, disagreement with a specific term looks like just another attempt to differentiate, exactly the same reason for hype in the first place: marketing. Related to techbio in particular, I cannot see why this shouldn't be used. Drugs were historically discovered by serendipitous screenings in vitro. Now the idea is to discover them by mechanistic screening in silico. That looks substantially different to me to justify a marketing term.

"The companies that succeed won’t just be those that use the latest tools (and especially those that just claim AI will solve drug development) — they’ll be the ones that rethink the entire discovery and development process." Spot on!

Like
Reply
Matthew Hymes

Life Science Strategist - Business Development Professional - Ecosystem Contributor - Board Member - Change Agent

10mo

Chris Picardo & Joseph Horsman I think the larger issue with TechBio is that it is loosely tossed around and no one has taken the time to officially define it. My interpretation of TechBio is the tools (software, reagents, instruments...) driving new discoveries in BioTech and not simply BioTech companies using AI in their drug discovery. And just to clarify, BioTech means biologically-based drug development (for the moment).

See more comments

To view or add a comment, sign in

Explore content categories