Replies to post #29773 on Biotech Values

[Biowatch]

>>smaller biotech companies are "sensitive to unequal power issues & loss of control."<<

This is true. Small biotechs worry about telling all their secrets to a big pharma for fear that the best ideas will be cherry picked and the little biotech left in the dust (or left twisting in the wind if the big pharma views it as a low priority project.)

>>Another counseled approaching meetings "in an atmosphere of courtesy and respect" and added: "Avoid putting them on the defensive."<<

I've heard people at big pharmas laugh at the amount of up-front money they put into some partnerships, calling it "chump change." Typically, big pharma has equipment and people to throw at a project, although any program runs the risk of being dropped at a moment's notice if there is a change in strategy.

I knew that MRK lost some of their top scientists, but didn't realize that it was due to friction with Kim. I think several more left after the Vioxx debacle.

Quay at NSTK is not shy about expressing his opinions. I think MRK did become risk-adverse after Vioxx. I heard MRK was testing PYY at high doses to push the envelope of safety, as serious adverse events were not observed at lower doses. MRK hasn't lost all interest in PYY, so they must have seen something promising.