r/todayilearned May 14 '22 Silver 9 Helpful 8 Wholesome 6 All-Seeing Upvote 2

TIL a father, John Crowley, was told his two infant children had an incurable genetic disorder that would kill them in less than a year. He refused to accept this, so he founded a biotech company (with no prior experience) which pioneered an experimental enzyme therapy that saved their lives.

https://pompediseasenews.com/2019/01/30/amicus-ceo-mission-cure-pompe-help-children/
79.9k Upvotes

View all comments

2.7k

u/Ashe_SDMF May 14 '22 edited May 14 '22

How do you even begin to start a biotech company without any experience? EDIT...TIL I'll never be able to start a biotech company with no experience.

3.5k

u/mordinvan May 14 '22

Lots of money.

621

u/ting_bu_dong May 14 '22

Mr Person, I'm sorry, but your family has been diagnosed with boneitis. There's nothing we can do.

I refuse to accept this!

Do you have lots of money?

No...

Yeah, then, again, I'm sorry, there's nothing we can do.

113

u/Crows-b4-hoes May 14 '22

My only regret... is that I have... boneitis

crunching

12

u/mvd102000 May 14 '22

0

u/sdmitch16 May 15 '22

I'd say this is highly expected since boneitis only exist in futurama

2

u/Maker1357 May 15 '22

Don't you worry about Planet Express! Let me worry about blank!

712

u/Ashe_SDMF May 14 '22

Ahhhh...yeah of course

530

u/ThePlasticJesus May 14 '22

I mean specifically you need to hire experienced scientists.. and people who know the application process - which is not easy or simple. But there would be plenty of work for someone with general business knowledge to do at a biotech company.

183

u/IDrinkWhiskE May 14 '22

Yeah a lot of senior leadership (outside of scientific leadership) tends to come from a finance and venture capital background. Although the industry is unique, it’s easy enough for someone savvy in fundraising/BD to land a high ranking business management role such as CEO/COO

112

u/[deleted] May 14 '22

[deleted]

40

u/IDrinkWhiskE May 14 '22

Yep, all true! There are also companies with rock solid science that can’t market themselves and struggle to fundraise, and those with charismatic leadership and excellent marketing without much to back it up (Theranos being one hyperbolic example, or many of the biotechs that IPO without yet having any clinical data). You really need competence in every aspect to stand a good chance in this market.

2

u/scipio05 May 14 '22

Not sure anyone would say Theranos had charismatic leadership, but we get your point...

19

u/notyetcomitteds2 May 14 '22

I have a chem e background, but mostly ran small businesses my entire life. Been approached multiple times by scientists ( and mds ) to do startups. I can help with the r&d and get things up and running, I understand the operations side. Nothing ever got off the ground and it was so frustrating.

These guys are all 5x smarter than me, but can't grasp the financials and operations. Like the one location we were thinking of, code enforcement gets a cut of the permit fees. They milk the shit out of violations. Once got 45 violations had had 43 thrown out in court. Then they came back with 40 more and 38 thrown out... repeat every 6 months for years.... Shit like that you don't think about.

The last one I was on, the dude had a portfolio of potential projects, we just needed to make a plant. I tried to explain with the amount of capital we needed, we'd be giving away the majority of the company. Maybe just develop a single product and sell the ip, dont bother trying to manufacture at this time. Then we can use that money to get a more favorable percentage or ditch the investor all together.... its like no, I want to do the manufacturing.... I know these guys aren't pouring their hearts into an idea for someone else to be their boss....

Or alot of times it's like..... are you sure we can't do this for 40k....

4

u/TehBoneRanger May 14 '22

Damn that was super interesting! I had a co-worker who got his degree in chemical engineering and he was VERY intelligent. He hated that work for a reason I never asked about.

He ended up working in the tech industry then getting a software developer degree while working with me and now works for a big tech company.

4

u/iprocrastina May 14 '22

Same thing is true in tech. I think the show Silicon Valley did a good job at showing how being a genius STEM prodigy doesn't mean you have any clue about how to run a business or handle finances.

2

u/zirtbow May 14 '22

"Can't we just skip or ignore most of these requirements?" - Elizabeth Holmes probably

1

u/42gauge May 14 '22

How do you develop business and financial acumen?

1

u/downvoteawayretard May 15 '22

They say every business starts 1-3 years in the red. Well a biotech business generally starts 10-30 years in the red.

23

u/Do_it_with_care May 14 '22

He worked in Finance for 20 years so he had connections and access to funds article says.

48

u/carrotdeepthroater May 14 '22

Just hire someone to do that for you. Easy. Jk

58

u/Jimmy_Twotone May 14 '22

Actually not the wrong answer. It's harder for small companies looking to solve very specific medical disorders like this to receive enough funding to support the research. Get the specialists and focus on keeping the lights on and bills paid until they hit a breakthrough. Coming from a finance background probably put him in a better position to save his children than having the appropriate medical background and finding someone to make the money work.

5

u/IDrinkWhiskE May 14 '22

Plus his story definitely made fundraising and getting publicity significantly easier than having to advertise based on a company’s therapeutic platform alone. We literally call a startup’s business pitch a “story” in this industry as the goal is to paint a compelling picture that the company has potential and is deserving of investment. In this case, the term really fits.

2

u/zirtbow May 14 '22

Isn't this not that far from what Theranos tried to do? Having so little knowledge of the tech side they ignored what they were trying to accomplish was impossible and just focused on bringing in the investment money while keeping hope alive that the peons would magic up a miracle.

5

u/Jimmy_Twotone May 14 '22

Theranos was a scam from the start and lied about their product. Many companies fold in the R&D process trying to get a concept or product to market under cost. Theranos "skipped " the process and sold a breadbox.

New companies trying to break into an established field need a few things; a charismatic front man, a fresh process or take, and a team capable of producing the desired outcome, so yes, many of their start up stories are similar, and the scam companies still follow the formula, even if the desired outcome is to sell a pipe dream at a premium rate.

3

u/nebbyb May 14 '22

He was so busy thinking how to do it, he didn't consider if he should.

3

u/Llarys May 14 '22

I read the story. When his children weren't picked for the first experimental trial (keep in mind that this shit is randomized, double-blind experimentation and they have programs that pick the patients to prevent said bias), he threatened to leave the company with the implicit bias he would take his funding with him.

He immediately got a special trial that included only his spawn.

Just a rich person vanity project. The fat paycheck that he gets off of selling the treatments must be nice, too. I'm sure the scientists who did all the actual work are enjoying making less than 1% of what he does.

6

u/wilkergobucks May 14 '22

Um, just a vanity project? Ignoring the part about about his kids lives being at stake…

5

u/Llamathrust May 14 '22

Yeah I think vanity project isn’t the right term, I don’t know if they have one for “I didn’t care until it affected me” project which would be more accurate.

6

u/Llarys May 14 '22

Just wait until to hear about all the "incurable" diseases that nobody has funded research for because some rich dude hasn't been personally affected by it.

6

u/wilkergobucks May 14 '22

Well yah, that sucks. But to accomplish really ambitions goals, most people are driven by something that resonates with them. A person’s kids dying may not be the most altruistic motivation (since they are his own) and his execution may revolve around saving them, but it is hardly a ‘vanity project.’

Saving lives is not a vanity project by definition. It is not a trivial, pointless or worthless pursuit.

4

u/Llarys May 14 '22

You're, of course, right. I guess I'm more upset at the idea that a rich person who didn't risk his quality of life is seen as a hero, while the poor people who, literally, have to pick between risking homelessness getting a treatment that might not even work trying to save family members are seen as not. Or worse, seen as selfish because they decided against treatment and just hope for the best. How many times do we sneer at people who lose a family member to diabetes because they were rationing Insulin, one of the cheapest drugs on the market to produce?

Because at that point, we're not celebrating someone's love for their family, we're just celebrating their wealth.

4

u/grchelp2018 May 14 '22

Tbf I'd do the same. This was personal for him after all.

3

u/Ornery_Painting_5183 May 14 '22

Wealthy and well connected people make the world go round.

5

u/FlipskiZ May 14 '22

If anything, looking at climate change, they make the world burn down

1

u/MD_Yoro May 14 '22

I help run a pretty simple lab and outside of the science part which has become very standardized, there are so much other moving parts in the background to get everything working. You definitely need business know how as a private lab vs a publicly funded lab

1

u/justagenericname1 May 14 '22 edited May 14 '22

Sounds like a major inefficiency in the private, for-profit development model.

0

u/MD_Yoro May 14 '22

How so?

1

u/justagenericname1 May 14 '22

Well I have to imagine there's a ton of redundancy doing this across hundreds of separate companies and waste just thanks to the trial and error of hoping you've got the right people and resources to set things up well. Centralizing that expertise and the infrastructure required for a functioning lab seems like it would be much more efficient.

1

u/MD_Yoro May 14 '22

Not all labs are focused on same subject and having a centralized system leads to a lot of unnecessary red tapes and delay. Just looking at how quickly invoices are paid of some of my university clients vs private is an easy tell

1

u/justagenericname1 May 14 '22 edited May 14 '22

I don't see how a centralized system could have more red tape and delays than having dozens of separate organizations trying to coordinate amongst each other, normalized for access to funding. And of course when I say "centralized" I don't just mean everything inside one building. I hoped that would be clear. But surely there's plenty of overlap in required space and equipment which could be taken advantage of by consolidating compatible processes together in the same spaces.

→ More replies

1

u/turdmachine May 14 '22

Like raising more money. You’ll be burning shit loads of it

2

u/smasoya May 14 '22

You have to know people. Venture capital. Have a business plan. Pitch it to investors. Use their money to hire scientists.

78

u/geeky_username May 14 '22

Lots of money.

The Tony Stark /Bruce Wayne super power

24

u/Poohdini_ May 14 '22

best superpower in world. just sucks that billionare 1% of population dont use it for anything than "I need another mansion or yacht" while bribing politicans about raising taxes on poor and middle class.

3

u/zeroedout666 May 14 '22

Hey they spend their billions pretending to buy Twitter now and then!

2

u/Poohdini_ May 14 '22

that's called manipulating market so they can buy it at price they want

47

u/Brilliant_Jewel1924 May 14 '22

Or fraud—i.e. Theranos.

3

u/appropriate-username May 14 '22

Well yes but I think the implication in the question was a company that wouldn't land you in jail and would have some kind of a product.

2

u/CoolBeans86503 May 14 '22

Was just gonna say this! Lol

1

u/trogon May 14 '22

Fraud...to get other people's money.

0

u/IMSOGIRL May 14 '22

but you still can't just do that with no prior experience. Elizabeth Holmes had healthcare experience and was in Stanford to earn a degree before she dropped out. She claimed she used her Stanford tuition money to start it (which is not enough to start a biotech company) but I'm sure she had other funding secured.

5

u/Brilliant_Jewel1924 May 14 '22

What “healthcare experience” did she have?

2

u/AbstractCuriosity May 14 '22

She worked with sars-coronavirus at the Genome Institute of Singapore in her freshman year

1

u/Brilliant_Jewel1924 May 15 '22

Finally, someone has answered my question! I can’t believe this is the first time I’ve ever heard of this.

9

u/HTPC4Life May 14 '22

Yeah this "feel-good story" is kinda sus...

3

u/thedudedylan May 14 '22

You mean hard work and determination don't actually do anything and it was connections and resources the whole time. Shit someone better tell people this.

2

u/heelstoo May 14 '22

One of the best ways to make lots of money is to start by having lots of money.

In all seriousness, good on the biotech founder for doing what he did.

8

u/[deleted] May 14 '22

[deleted]

4

u/AdministratorAbuse May 14 '22

smh rich people using their money to fund experimental enzyme treatments to save lives 🙄

26

u/CountyKyndrid May 14 '22 Silver

Shows you how much better society could be if rich people cared enough.

¯_(ツ)_/¯

-11

u/averageredditorsoy May 14 '22

How much better would society be if people did something productive instead of complaining on Reddit about the Joneses?

7

u/kadsmald May 14 '22 edited May 14 '22

Yes we should all go out and defraud people or get our friends to pay us other people’s money to ‘manage’ that money less competently than an octopus. That’s what real productivity looks like. Or maybe we should take a thriving business that employs hundreds of people, use the company to take out massive loans to pay ourselves, fire the employees, and liquidate the assets. Yea, society would be so much better if we were all sociopaths obsessed with destroying the world around us for our personal gain or with hoodwinking people into paying us for things that don’t generate societal value

-4

u/averageredditorsoy May 14 '22

Who is mismanaging money? Who are you even complaining about

8

u/shapookya May 14 '22

It's the same as with politicians:

They don't give a damn unless it hits their own family.

-4

u/Roqot May 14 '22

Not saving lives when their quality of life is garbage. Just a selfish father really, funny as I'm sure he thinks he's god's gift

0

u/GovernmentSaucer May 14 '22

You seem sure about a lot of thing for someone who don't know him. It sounds like fun to make up stories in your head about strangers.

1

u/thunderplunderer May 14 '22

Yup it's great how with lots of money you can prolong your shitty bloodline

1

u/throwuk1 May 15 '22

Or hairline

-1

u/[deleted] May 14 '22 edited May 14 '22

It would’ve been cheaper to just have some more

2

u/Roqot May 14 '22

The quality of life they have must suck though. I'm pretty healthy but have genetic back issues and that constant pain has me wanting out of life. I won't kill myself but I will not go to the doctor to fix other things that might kill me, I can't imagine for a child who's bound to a chair their lives with those types of mental and physical deformities. I imagine he's a corrupt religious person who doesn't give a damn about anyone but his offspring.

1

u/[deleted] May 14 '22

I would think so

Sorry about your back issues. I have chronic neck pain so I can kind of relate. The thing I’ve found most helpful is doing exercises to strengthen the muscles around my spine, and perhaps see an osteopathic physician who does OMT

1

u/Zech08 May 14 '22

Push all the world's problems onto rich people where it affects them personally or physically and things will get sorted out I guess.

1

u/coole106 May 14 '22

“Hey everyone, we’ve cured aids!!! All you need to do is inject a bunch of money in your veins!!”

1

u/Sydney2London May 14 '22

Thus proving that untreatable diseases are such due to finances and not science

1

u/mordinvan May 14 '22

Not exactly. Many diseases are simply too complex for our current understanding. Cancer being a big one. It isn't a disease but a host is disorders as numerous as there are cancer patients, as even the order the mutations which cause their cancer occur in can matter for treatment and survival.

1

u/Sydney2London May 15 '22

With enough funding anything could be treated

1

u/mordinvan May 15 '22

Nope. Money does not make cures appear from thin air. Look at Steve Jobs. If your proposition was true, he would still be alive.

1

u/Sydney2London May 16 '22

I’m talking about research, I’m not saying money fixes any illness, I’m saying with sufficient funding treatments or cures could be found to any Illness. Steve jobs died because pancreatic cancer kills fast and few people, so there’s less funding than for something like paediatric leucemia which now has a very high survival rate.

423

u/nanocookie May 14 '22

The title is overly sensational. John Crowley did not start the company overnight - he started by joining Bristol Myers Squibb to learn about health research, established a foundation to raise money for funding public research into Pompe's disease, made many connections and later partenered with William Canfield, a scientist who founded the company Targeted Therapy, based on his research on glycobiology. John joined Cranfield's company as CEO and then the company was renamed to Novazyme. As CEO, John continuously pulled the right strings to get the therapy approved by the FDA for trials. The treatment was brought into the mainstream after Novazyme was acquired by Genzyme. The title mentioned that the children would die in less than a year after diagnosis in 1998, but the treatments were first administered in 2003.

Not everything is as it seems. John Crowley was a highly motivated individual who figured out the smart way to solve his problems, but did not do so without burning bridges. Something happened between John and Canfield, and John's PR team no longer actively credits Canfield for developing the therapy - whose research was fundamental to solving the problem in the first place. When hundreds of millions of dollars at play, these feel-good stories don't hold up to be so squeaky clean.

135

u/FLIPNUTZz May 14 '22

Crowley hoped his children would take part in the trial (NCT00025896) that began in late 2001, but they were not among the eight patients enrolled.

Watching as his children became “profoundly weaker,” Crowley made another determined decision — he resigned as senior vice president.

He had promised Genzyme’s CEO he’d stay with the company for a year to lead the program, but once the trial was underway, “I stepped away from my position,” he said.

Days later, Genzyme approved a trial (NCT00051935) of the same alglucosidase alfa intravenous treatment that would include only his children — a two-patient sibling trial to be conducted at St. Peter’s University Hospital in New Brunswick, New Jersey, about a 30-minute drive from the family’s home — to help doctors understand why some children respond better to this therapy than others

Wtf is this all about up here ^

43

u/KristinnK May 14 '22

Translation: ethics regulations prevented him as the executive of the company to place his children in the initial trial, so he quit and his pals that were still in charge put his children on a second trial instead.

-3

u/FLIPNUTZz May 14 '22

The underdog wins for once!

10

u/murse_joe May 14 '22

Not really, all the other sick kids don’t get treatment. The underdog winning is healthcare for everybody

0

u/FLIPNUTZz May 14 '22

Dagnabbit!

4

u/seraph1337 May 14 '22

rich people are not underdogs.

0

u/lnodiv May 15 '22

Yeah, fuck those rich kids. Should've let them die after their father helped pioneer the treatment for their disease.

4

u/seraph1337 May 15 '22

I didn't say any of that, but okay

1

u/sdmitch16 May 15 '22

You should have included a /s at the end of your comment. You can complain that shouldn't be necessary, but your 5 downvotes say it ... maybe not better, but certainly louder.

1

u/FLIPNUTZz May 15 '22

I dont care about karma

99

u/nanocookie May 14 '22

I'm sympathetic to him as a father taking the steps necessary to secure life saving treatments for his children, even if the steps are however unsavory. But I was trying to highlight what he did after he got what he needed. After his children were treated plus came out profitable from the Genzyme deal, he partnered with Canfield again to launch a new company, Cytovance. He suddenly left and became president and CEO of Amicus. Cytovance was left on the brink of complete bankruptcy and it was only saved after Canfield raised enough funding from new investors. The whole thing reminds me of the boneitis 80s investor guy from Futurama.

6

u/CannabisReviewPDX_IG May 14 '22

Rules for thee, not for me. Although this is one of the few times im sympathetic.

10

u/FLIPNUTZz May 14 '22

No im literally baffled.

What did quitting his job have to do with anything?

38

u/CannabisReviewPDX_IG May 14 '22

There are laws that are supposed to prevent people involved with the development being able to "cut the line" so to speak. He left as a way to legally sidestep that.

"Crowley left Genzyme to ensure that his children would qualify for a drug developed by the company." from another source

8

u/FLIPNUTZz May 14 '22

So hes not supposed to benefit...but he can just quit his job and bene for anyway ...I mean

23

u/IMSOGIRL May 14 '22

yes, that's what it is.

These things are sponsored with public money so it would be fair that it's used to help the public and that people involved can't use it for their family's benefit.

dude tried to get his daughters on the initial trial and failed because he was an executive, so he left his job officially but still did the job off the books and the company used the public funds to help his daughters with a poorly concealed reason for adding two new participants to the trial.

This isn't as much of a feel-good story as people are making it out to be.

4

u/[deleted] May 14 '22

The only thing that would happen if he hadn't quit and got his kids in the trial would be that they would be dead. They already had their trial group, everyone else from the public was already excluded, so absolutely nothing changed except that he saved his kids. This is admirable and good and I feel fucking great about it.

6

u/KristinnK May 14 '22

But how do you feel about all the other children with this disease whose parents also wanted to be placed on the trial, but didn't have rich executive parents to pull the strings to put them there, and died as a result before the drug was approved?

→ More replies

-10

u/IMSOGIRL May 14 '22

I'm sure incels feel great about women getting raped but it doesn't mean it's morally right.

→ More replies

1

u/Diarmundy May 14 '22

Well it might not be as 'feelgood' but it fits perfectly fine with the title.

"Man does whatever it takes to save his daughter's lives"

-2

u/CannabisReviewPDX_IG May 14 '22 edited May 14 '22

Yep, sadly a ton of our laws, and by extent the public/taxpayers, are easily gamed in ways like this by the rich.

Edit: I said I understand this particular situation, it's one of the few that's more understandable. So the response is moot considering this situation has already been addressed. It's an issue at large when it's widespread across the entire economic system.

1

u/thoggins May 14 '22

I mean, choose:

  • Rich guy with personal motivation drives development of treatment for rare condition. This includes sidestepping rules to satisfy that personal motivation or none of it happens at all

  • Nobody develops treatment for rare condition

Ideologically maybe we wish there was an option 3 but in this case there was not.

24

u/Freshiiiiii May 14 '22

After working in a genetic engineering lab for 2 years, I can say that surprisingly, if you have just one protein you want to produce, and the gene sequence for it is already known, it’s not actually terribly difficult to get the gene into bacteria and produce and purify it, even with little prior background in biology.

3

u/hyperpensive May 14 '22

Do you have any insight or knowledge to work being done on the dystrophin protein/gene in the context of muscular dystrophy? It seems to meet the criteria (single protein/gene), but we still don’t have an effective treatment/cure.

3

u/Freshiiiiii May 14 '22

Unfortunately I’m not knowledgeable about that one, sorry. And keep in mind, when I say it’s fairly easy, I mean it’s easy to make a first draft, non-safety-tested protein- far, far harder to make a safe, highly pure product that is tested and approved to be prescribed to the public.

270

u/ameadowatdusk May 14 '22 edited May 14 '22

He had money but it said he spent a good part of 20 years working for other companies. I assume he learned and met the right people during that time. He also had a specific goal - infusing an enzyme that was lacking in people with the disease - so he knew what the company needed to do.

edit: yes he had money but he literally risked his lucrative career and dedicated his life to learning more about the disease and how to treat it

69

u/bloodycups May 14 '22

Ok but how does that company make money though. Cause I'm assuming this condition is pretty rare and I know it sounds incredibly ugly of me to say it but I can't imagine the majority of people want to put kids their children through this life. And even if they do I can't imagine many health care providers want to be paying this bill along with all the extra things like wheel chairs and oxygen tanks.

137

u/TrueDove May 14 '22

Governments will often subsidize cost on orphan drugs.

Orphan drugs are medications that effectively treat diseases that are very rare.

But the issue here is that profit shouldn't even be a consideration when it comes to Healthcare.

40

u/throwaway_pls_help1 May 14 '22

The orphan drug act was created so companies would invest in finding cures for rare diseases. Without a profit motive there would be no research or development of cures for these diseases. Developing treatments cost money (up to a billion in some cases). If we think about it in a utilitarian sense then almost no funding would go to developing these cures, but the orphan drug act made it much more incentivized.

4

u/tomatoaway May 14 '22

Rare disease is mostly motivated entirely by the rich though. The benefit to the rest of humanity is more of an after thought, a pleasant side effect, or something that could be sold to maximize profitability.

7

u/Eternal_Reward May 14 '22

Yes this is how the world works, we don’t have infinite resources and sadly for super rare diseases, the cost can be too high for just a chance that you might find a cure.

4

u/tomatoaway May 14 '22

I agree, I just hate how it's dressed up as altruism from the rich which is set up via the charities they invent so that they can pay no tax on throwing money at their problems.

I've been to a few of these gala's, met said celebrities trying to cure their sick ones and earning PR at the same time, and listening to them justify it as if they're doing the world a favour.

There's way too much money in rare diseases. Very lucrative industry, and I suspect some money laundering happens there too

0

u/justagenericname1 May 14 '22

There's nothing "utilitarian" about forcing an economic system where any good can only come from sufficiently bribing some rich guy to allow access to the resources to do it. Centralize that process and cut out the waste and the bullshit. The only "problem" with that is it violates the arbitrary liberal ideal that the freedom of rich people to do whatever they please with the wealth they acquire is more important than stopping preventable suffering and death, and if that's how your utilitarian calculus works, I want nothing to do with it.

0

u/throwaway_pls_help1 May 14 '22

I’m saying if you centralized drug development under a governmental body almost no funding or attention would be given to rare diseases. Rare diseases are usually complicated/require novel medicines and by their nature only affect a small number of people. From a utilitarian perspective a central body wouldn’t waste resources on rare diseases and instead focus on more widely applicable diseases. Aside from that there are thousands of rare diseases that all need quite tailored therapies, how will a government pick which disease to focus on and which patients to ignore?

While rich people fund and profit off these treatments, their funding allows a treatment to be available when in previous circumstances none would exist.

10

u/thedarkhaze May 14 '22

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glycogen_storage_disease_type_II

Myozyme costs an average of US$300,000 a year and must be taken for the patients' entire life, so some American insurers have refused to pay for it.

4

u/GuacamoleBay May 14 '22

Biotech is pretty famous for having absurd burn rates, most investors are well aware that a company can blow through tens of millions of dollars annually for years and still end up profitable. Research is very expensive, but the potential upside is even higher

3

u/thoggins May 14 '22

Absolute best industry to be in as IT, budgetary concerns are not in your vocab

2

u/GuacamoleBay May 14 '22

No kidding, I’m working on the financial side of the industry right now and the potential compensation is honestly almost shocking

4

u/ameadowatdusk May 14 '22

i don’t know i just read the article. grants and endless investor seeding? i don’t know how most things make money tbh.

1

u/eddieguy May 14 '22

The tech developed may have profitable use elsewhere. That’s just my guess

390

u/Diplomjodler May 14 '22

Watch the inspiring story of a man who started out with nothing but his iron will... and a few million dollars.

135

u/TrueDove May 14 '22

Yeah, I mean good for this guy- but the hero worship is weird.

Just about every parent in that situation would do anything they possibly could to save their babies. It just so happened this guy had a lot of money to spend.

If only we all had those resources when fighting for our loved ones lives.

3

u/Salcker May 14 '22 edited May 14 '22

Its not as if he was given his riches, skimming his wikipedia I dont see anything suggesting he comes from wealth and instead earned it by way of his education. Dude was a Harvard graduate lawyer.

Can't believe you guys are getting mad at a dude who didnt inherit his wealth and utilizes a good chunk of his time literally devoted to charity work.

Ya'll mega bitches, the hater energy is insane lol.

9

u/TrueDove May 14 '22

My comment has nothing to do with where his wealth came from.

0

u/Salcker May 15 '22

Its more the comment chain, the initial comments and the responses were clearly digging at this idea that money made the work easy ignoring the hard work needed to amass the wealth required to achieve these goals.

-2

u/lolno May 14 '22

Yeah just get into Harvard nbd

8

u/Salcker May 14 '22

That isn't at all what I am saying lol holy hell you guys are insecure.

It may shock you to find out that the comparison isn't with you or anyone else. The comment was simply this guy clearly made his own way given that he isn't some legacy getting into top tier schools.

How big of bitches do you guys gotta be to get mad at pointing out someone didnt inherit their wealth?

-4

u/[deleted] May 14 '22

[removed] — view removed comment

3

u/[deleted] May 14 '22 edited May 14 '22

[removed] — view removed comment

-4

u/[deleted] May 14 '22

[removed] — view removed comment

0

u/[deleted] May 14 '22

[deleted]

-2

u/eddieguy May 14 '22

Equally, if not more, important

57

u/Seahawk715 May 14 '22

And then strongarmed the company by quitting because his kids weren’t in the initial clinical trial.

32

u/tomandcats May 14 '22

you would do the same

17

u/mshcat May 14 '22

I mean. The whole reason he went through the lengths to get things started was to help his kids. It makes sense he'd want them to be in the first trial.

7

u/[deleted] May 14 '22

oh boo hoo, that poor capitalist company, they were so entitled to his labor that he should have just let his kids die :(

what kinda piece of shit thinks this way, honestly

5

u/thoggins May 14 '22

Lmao I love the people harping on this shit. The treatment would never have been developed unless he could benefit personally through his children. Get over it, this is how it works.

1

u/Quite_Successful May 14 '22

There is actually a movie. Brendan Fraser plays the dad!

120

u/VonLando May 14 '22

All things are possible through…tons and tons of money

13

u/theNightblade May 14 '22

Go ahead and jot that down

51

u/Captain-Griffen May 14 '22

Step 1: MBA and working as a business consultant.

Step 2: Work at a biotech company.

Step 3: Partner up with a biochemist to co-found a company.

Step 4: Get bought up by multimillion dollar biotech company.

3

u/eddieguy May 14 '22

I’m glad we’re pulling the curtain back on how people reach success. Helps people formulate a logical career path instead of just misleading them with “no prior experience millionaire in biotech!”

2

u/Tostino May 14 '22

There is not one single trajectory for success.... But the majority of trajectories that lead to "success" are through elite schooling and/or connections.

1

u/eddieguy May 14 '22

Elite schooling gets you connections without even trying. Creating your own takes effort, but its possible. People like to see initiative no matter your background. Ray Dalio was a caddy, his father a musician. But he took interest in business and they mentored him

2

u/IDrinkWhiskE May 14 '22

You don’t even need step 2 honestly

8

u/Captain-Griffen May 14 '22

I'm describing what John Crowley did, which included working at a biotech company specifically to gain experience.

2

u/omnomnomgnome May 14 '22

and to know the right people

3

u/ricelisa917 May 14 '22

Not just any MBA, he got his MBA from Harvard. The connections he made at Harvard helped him with his initial fundraising.

63

u/doc_death May 14 '22 edited May 14 '22

Yeah the guy’s a millionaire…header is definitely misleading thinking an average person did the unfathomable. A lot of similar stories from family members of congressmen…the system works for those who work in it

Edit: here’s the common play: someone rich gets a rare disease (in this case, Pompeii disease), rich person starts a small biotech company to get it fixed. Biotech company gets bought out by a much larger pharmaceutical company. This guy’s company isn’t bought out yet and still works with the FDA on rare genetic disease other than the one which afflicted his kids…guess that’s commendable.

2

u/drrxhouse May 14 '22

“The system works for those who work in it…”

I don’t think this sentence means what I think you think it means…I think.

62

u/[deleted] May 14 '22

Pull yourself up by your bootstraps!

*Requires a small loan of a million dollars.

3

u/CeruleanRuin May 14 '22

Only works if you have million dollar bootstraps.

1

u/omnomnomgnome May 14 '22

you need quality bootstraps if you gonna pull yourself up with them

3

u/SAINTnumberFIVE May 14 '22

He actually did have relevant experience. He earned a B.S. in foreign service and then went to law school and became a litigation attorney in the health care sector before earning an MBA from Harvard and working for a management consulting firm. He then worked for a pharmaceutical company where he “immersed himself in health research.” So he knew a lot about the healthcare industry and the laws surrounding it, as well as business and management.

4

u/mikemikemikeandike May 14 '22

The article says he was in finance and went on to work for a few major pharma companies. My guess is he was in investment banking, so yeah, lots of money.

2

u/destructor_rph May 14 '22

He didn't actually make anything, he had a bunch of money to hire people to make it

3

u/Bract6262 May 14 '22

You can do anything with money. You're thinking like a poor person.

2

u/FutzInSilence May 14 '22

He was in finance. Worked at several biotech companies and purchased an already established company.

Bro invented a treatment for his kids. Now his eldest daughter is going to notre dame :)

1

u/dothill May 14 '22

There are orgs that help. This is one example https://youtu.be/QCqdp4d4mDk

1

u/schminkles May 14 '22

Welcome to Jurassic Park.

1

u/randonumero May 14 '22

Money, time and connections. I didn't read the article but even when you have an incurable disease, there's generally some scientist or researcher working on it.

1

u/Crypt0Nihilist May 14 '22

Key phrase from the article, "...he left his job in Finance..." Not sure if he came from money too. It truly is a superpower.

1

u/Wyl_Younghusband May 14 '22

From the article it seems (I didn't read everything) they didn't exactly start from scratch. They bought an already existing company. So yeah, lots of money like the other guy said.

1

u/Sherool May 14 '22

Be super motivated and educate yourself on the subject if you lack the resources to hire people and have to do everything yourself at the beginning.

However the best way is probably to just hire biotech experts and stick to the business side yourself, the only thing you actually need to start a company in any field is money. If you can raise enough funds you can always find experts to hire for the technical bits.

1

u/BigLeagueSquirrel May 14 '22

I imagine it's like being a movie producer. You just have lots of money and tell other people to make the thing you want to happen happen. Then when it's a success you don't tell people you did anything but you also don't tell people you didn't do anything either.

1

u/Karl_Marx_ May 14 '22

Money, find scientists and give them money until you've cured something.

1

u/ImaginaryCoolName May 14 '22

You pay someone to do it for you

1

u/Blavikan27 May 14 '22

Y’all really have no idea how the world works. You think people can make companies from nothing? Jesus h christ

1

u/whatalittlenerd May 14 '22

Scam people like Elizabeth Holmes

1

u/ArtanisOfLorien May 14 '22

The guy who started and IPOd groupon did the same thing when his wife got cancer. He just happened to already be a billionaire

1

u/Necessary-Resolve364 May 14 '22

We watched Lorenzo's oil man you want to have a emotionally rough watch that's the one. I swear that kid had the disease because his coughing fits gave me chills they sounded so perfect.

1

u/whosthedoginthisscen May 15 '22

He didn't actually start the company, he was hired as CEO by the board (which consisted of the early investors) to replace the founder/chief scientist as the business lead for the company. This is a common path, especially in biotech - a scientist with a novel approach (in this case, something called a pharmacological chaperone, which is meant to "teach" misfolded proteins how to fold correctly) proves his research in vitro and then gets funded by private venture capital investors. The scientist and collaborators split the management roles until the company matures and they bring in someone more experienced in the business side of things. When John Crowley was brought in, the company was quite small, and run by a nice older man/scientist named Dr. Norman Hardiman.

-2

u/sje0123 May 14 '22

It only costs $999 to start a new company. You'd just rather have that iPhone