If you read the newspapers, you may not know it, but biotechnology is going through a process of collapse. According to authoritative pharmaceutical industry online Endpoints News:
The opening months of 2025 have offered no respite to the chilly biotech market of the last few years, biotech correspondent Kyle LaHucik reported this week. Despite the comeback everybody seems to want, there’s been a steady drumbeat of restructurings, pipeline cuts, layoffs and short-lived pivots. Kyle highlighted iTeos Therapeutics, once a darling of the anti-TIGIT class of biotechs, as an embodiment of the current struggles. iTeos had a clinical failure and lost a partnership with GSK this spring. It’s now shut down.
The picture is stark. Biotechnology is in a terminal existential crisis. According to Raymond James bankers who provided data to Endpoints, there were six strategic reviews launched in April alone, with 30 active strategic reviews as of 4 May. These strategic reviews are being conducted because biotechnology research is not delivering viable products. According to Stifel bankers, at least 168 biotechnology companies have negative enterprise value as of 16 May. And the dreariness follows 90 total restructurings in 2024. Fewer than five new biotechnology companies have been floated so far this year, down from 16 last year.
Biotechnology is an industry built on an exclusively materialistic paradigm of life. In fact, as everyone experiences every day, life involves a continuous interaction between consciousness and matter, mind and body, psychology and physiology, awareness and the environment. To pretend otherwise, to ignore consciousness as the prime mover of life, as myopic bio scientists continue to do so, is a fatal error and a scientific dead end.
As a result, biotechnology is an industry built on false advertising dreams and the same kind of financial thinking that leads millions of people, who are doomed to disappointment, to buy lottery tickets every week.
Five years ago, a door was opened which allowed failed covid “vaccine” and treatment products onto the market without long-term testing. This was not just “on the market,” it was forced on unwilling populations as a modern-day exponential expansion of Mengele-style medical research. The result has been a public health disaster, as we all now know (except for some extreme dreamers who keep their faith and belief in a biotechnology future). Floundering in a sea of adverse events, they are trying to save their misguided and twisted paradigm of life by pretending success is just around the corner. Vinay Prasad, Trump’s head of the Centre for Biologics Evaluation and Research (“CBER”), which regulates biotechnology, has promised “to ‘rapidly’ push even small advances for rare disease drugs.”
Reality may now be catching up with this hopeful, or is it hopeless, kind of thinking but, unfortunately, vaccines still enjoy protection from product liability or efficacy standards. Therefore, the excessive claims of the industry and the harms that result cannot be judged in the courts. Nor do their deficiencies find any but the smallest echo in the media. There are powerful monetary, government and career incentives at work here. The billions made during the pandemic from fake cures are sufficient to drive to a frenzy those who seek to profit by controlling medical, political, scientific and financial narratives. Their twisted dreams extend to rebuilding the physiology of whole populations, no matter the certainty of deadly risks, the sea of unknowns or the obvious and final impossibility of the whole enterprise.
The journal Nature headlined last week ‘Cancer-fighting immune cells could soon be engineered inside our bodies’. Because CAR T-cell gene therapy for cancer sufferers is so expensive ($800,00 per shot), risky, difficult to administer, laborious and time-consuming to make, researchers are pushing the boundaries, hoping to re-engineer the body’s own cells to produce novel cancer-fighting capabilities using mRNA technology. What could possibly go wrong?
The terminology of biotechnology research is a dead giveaway. An article in The Guardian headlines ‘‘Inverse vaccines’: the promise of a ‘holy grail’ treatment for autoimmune diseases’. Which describes the “hope,” or is it hype, of some researchers that the genetic suppression of parts of the immune system will cure a multitude of diseases. Really??? Suppressing the immune system will cure disease and there won’t be a downside??? Note the use of the word “promise” and the reference to the myth of the Holy Grail which brings to mind a fruitless search through the ages for something that may not exist, over which bloody battles were fought.
Hellbound and Down 