We came up with a cure to cancer and no VC wants to fund us | Hacker News Reader

We came up with a cure to cancer and no VC wants to fund us

14 pointslabvie18 comments

I've been trying to fundraise for my company, we found a compound that reduces tumor formation by 80%, effectively its a cure to cancer waiting to be marketed. The second compound inhibits fat collection in adipose tissue, its a good inhibitor to heart disease. Both are major breakthroughts.

We even got an offer to buy us out for 200 million. And yet, we turned down the offer in hopes to turn this into a company. I feel as if I regret having done so. No VC wants to even give us a chance. Perhaps its still to early, but I don't know. I hate the idea of selling it all.

I'm new to fundraising, but I never knew that VC's could be so cruel. Most of them have been quite mean, it is no wonder Travis from Uber dislikes them. We both do.

View on HN

It seems really doubtful a startup would have two breakthrough drugs in different categories. I wouldn't answer an email with this information either. Plus the light conspiracy talk about pharma companies wanting a treatment not a cure... It reduces your legitimacy. Look at the hepatitis cure, it's one of the biggest blockbusters of recent history.

How have you funded the R&D necessary to discover these compounds?

One of the issues that most other comments have forgotten and you have ignored in your statement is, do you have peer reviewed research? Do you have, or do you have plans to become, FDA approved? You say you have an 80% reduction in tumor formation. Which types? How many human trials have you done? What was the success rate in a double blind? Medicine is a super exciting field and gets a massive amount of funding. However, it also gets a high level of scrutiny due to the human risk involved.

You must be kidding... If you really had the cure you'd only have to setup a selfstarter and millions would come in no time. Thing is... Do you have proof to back your claims? Is the breakthrough published in a scientific journal? (Nature, Elsevier, Cell, etc)

https://github.com/lockitron/selfstarter

If you can't find funding--would you mind releasing the IP in the public domain so everyone can benefit?

If it helps, you'll be remembered long after the VCs are dust and forgotten.

I think we need more of this type of mindset if we want to upset the chemo market and make new treatments viable.

The truth is we didn't want to sell to big pharma, they would have shelved likely. Cures don't make profit, treatments do. This is why we wanted to create a company that could put this out to market in less than ten years, get it approved by the FDA as a breakthrough and have it in market in 5 years. Subsidize it to people with need and low income.

These are the reasons we felt being in control of the destiny of it was the safest bet. But so far, it seems that the easy way out is to sell it, which would mean it would not become what we want it to be, a cure to various diseases.

> Cures don't make profit, treatments do.

This shows that you don't understand the market well.

"Harvoni, made by Gilead Sciences, has cure rates of between 94 and 99 per cent. It is the successor to Gilead’s Sovaldi, which has accrued more than $7bn in US sales since it became available in the final quarter of 2013.

Early data suggest Harvoni is poised to be even more of a success."

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/7ac62214-5e1c-11e4-bc04-00144feabd...

Also, the goal of ALL cancer treatments is to cure the cancer (other than maybe slow growing prostate cancers and cancers where there is no cure available and the best you can do is palliative care).

I've restarted a citizen journalism blog (as I've been a hack freelance writer/editor for 15 years now). If there's anything I can do to help, by all means. I'm actually working on an interview with this gentleman:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pKY6i3Vpfso&feature=share

And so the synchronicity of this post hit me. If anything, I want you and your team to know that you are not alone in facing resistance from fears of the medical establishment. We build machines with faulty parts to maintain repeat customers (such as in the contrast of light bulbs made a century past that still do their job, compared to current toys that die out after so many weeks, etc). That mentality started with Edward Bernays, and it has infected every industry- particularly healthcare. But there are black sheep out there, I sincerely want to believe there are persons with means willing and able to challenge the status quo.

If you feel your team has something golden, then word needs to spread. This may even be more important than profit margins, as another commenter alluded to, and you need to really weigh such a thing.

Sorry to hear you're having a bad time of it.

From my experience with VCs I find them busy and skeptical rather than mean. They hear wild ambitions every day, so have a strong filter.

I have to ask, what was the nature of the cruelty?

It's hard to imagine anyone, VC or otherwise, being cruel to someone who was (a) raising a round in good faith and (b) holding an 80% effective cure for cancer... so I'm wondering what exactly happened?

How many VCs have you spoken to? Are their investment mandates compatible with your products? Have you done this before?

I've never raised before. It's the first time we create a private company based on the research we are doing. I contacted somewhere around 700, which includes partners, associates, juniors from about 100 VC firms.

All of that is really nice, and I hope you get the funding you need. There are interests that would see this fail to keep the chemomarket up and running. Anyhow, I would've taken the 200 million or even counteroffered something that would turn your company dreams into reality, like, ask for 20kk, and employment for you and your crew. It has been done before, IIRC, with some hair strength product.

500Startups is currently taking in more applicants, I would suggest trying for that.

You sound like you've got something great, don't give up there's a VC out there for you.

What is ironic is that I actually have Dave Mcclure's email/number, I reached out to him personally and he didn't so much as respond. It was quite a realization of how things work in SV. This week has been very tough, and disappointing. We will continue to bootstrap using grants from the NIH until something better comes along our way.

Which FOAs are you funded under?

Pharm is a terrible market to get funded in, if only because it's highly speculative, has very long lead times, and uncertain returns. Have you looked into angel funding instead of VC? For example, something like Dallas' Health Wildcatters (http://healthwildcatters.com/), which is an angel syndicate that currently has an oncology pharma company in their portfolio. Private equity might also be an option -- you'll give up control, but less so than you would in an outright buyout.

Obviously, the key questions are going to be where you are in trials, what universities you've partnered with, pretty much anything that could reduce investor risk. An 80% reduction in tumorigenesis (which kinds?) is a pretty bold claim, but definitely is an attention-getter!

Do you have any information about the compound? Is it nanotech? Did you synthesize it? Is it naturally occurring?

Have you considered applying to Y Combinator?

Yes, I have but we would have to be considered for summer in order to postpone our series A which we are commencing. If we raise money, we will not be able to do YC later on. I just know.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com