Investor in frontier brain and mental technologies. Cofounder at PsyMed Ventures and Business Trip. *I only accept connect requests that include a note with context*
Quick recap of interesting takes (some of my own and some of others) on how Trump and RFK policies will impact bio and health investing. Cuts in NIH (SBIR, STTR, others) will impact early biotechs that fully or partially rely on non-dilutive funding. Without it, these startups will have less capital to make progress, making VCs more hesitant to invest. Research cuts and capped indirect costs to universities lead to pharma and biotech having a hard time hiring junior scientists since PhD programs are usually where these scientists come from. However, researchers who used to work at NIH and FDA are in the market now, so we’ll see. Research cuts and capped indirect costs to universities will eventually lead to fewer biotech spinouts since less translational research will be done. Industry may fund more trials. I’m not sure. Less burdensome clinical trials and letting companies go to market with safety data and some efficacy data than before will lead to a higher speed of drug approval. Getting to phase 2 readouts will be challenging, but things might be much easier once you get there. In practice, this looks like drugs on the market without approval, and then pharma will collect data post-market to show efficacy. Patients and Providers will need support to sort through the available options. Cuts to FDA personnel might delay reviewing trial data, but most people agree there is too much redundancy at FDA and NIH, so maybe things won’t slow down. There’s a scenario where AI helps streamline and expedite the review process, but I’m not counting on that for a few years. Funding for autism research could be increased at the NIH. This will help present and future startups. Banning toxic food ingredients and chemical ingredients will lead to companies working on safer products getting acquired by big food (H/T Justin Mares) Bio VCs are going into “hold and wait” pattern to see how things shake out. More sitting on their cash. Investors don’t like uncertainty. Less funding for risk-on startups, short term at least. Despite the turbulence, we're investing. Early-stage VC operates on a clock that is somehow related but not synchronized to public markers. Companies are built 10+ years, and the best emerge regardless of market cycles. The opportunity set doesn’t shrink. Great science, strong teams, and paradigm shifting opportunities will always find a path forward. What else did I miss?