저자: Kevin · 외국인
요약 보기
모더나·머크의 개인화 mRNA 암백신(Interpath-001, 흑색종 재발률 감소 3상)이 획기적이라고 주장. 프리드버그의 '펩타이드 주사로 5만달러면 같은 효과' 주장을 반박하며, 수구세포 기반 면역 활성화(CD4/CD8, 전이 억제 59%)와 AI 기반 변이 선택의 차이를 강조. 모더나·바이오엔텍·일라이릴리에 소액 지분 보유를 밝히고 투자 권유는 부인.
다듬은 글
David Friedberg on the All-In podcast deliberately misled his entire audience, and it infuriates me. This, however, is not a reason to criticize the All-In podcast. This is an excuse to show you how they made a very big mistake. If you watch until the end, you will understand much better where they went wrong.
This is all related to the breakthrough in cancer treatment that we heard about on August 19th. If you haven't heard yet, it's a cancer vaccine that has passed phase three trials. This is actually a therapy, not a vaccine for disease prevention, but we learned about this breakthrough third phase of research.
This was the Interpath 001 study, a partnership between Moderna and Merck. They achieved their main goal— a significant reduction in the recurrence rate of melanoma, which may eventually apply to other types of solid tumors. In simple terms, we have the first phase III cancer therapy that can prevent —hopefully prevent, right?
We have to wait for the research to be completed. Prevent relapses in cancer patients. This is colossal. This is a defining moment. But David Friedberg says: “That’s enough for you. Seriously. It's just a joke. You can just go to some lab that makes mixtures without FDA approval, pay them 50 thousand and get the same thing.
This is complete nonsense." Here's what Friedberg says. But then he fundamentally misunderstands how the biomechanics of this process actually works. So now, with the help of beautiful drawings on the board and printouts, I will explain why David Friedberg is wrong. This is not to belittle them. They are just an excuse for enlightenment, because I believe they have done a great disservice.
So , let's start by listening for about a minute. So if you don't want to listen to it, just fast forward a minute. I'll recap the main points, but I want you to hear it for yourself. What upsets me most is that everyone is calling this a unique breakthrough, something special and powerful. But that's not true.
Because a lot of people go to places like Montana, where they have peptides printed to the specific sequence of their cancer, they create their own neoantigens, they inject them into their bodies, and they are cured of their cancer. You can pay someone $50,000 to have it done for you today. There are many clinics that do this.
And it's not some special drug approved by the FDA. To your word, Jakal, it's just a process. The idea is to take the DNA sequence of my cancer, create a protein, inject it back into my body, and my immune system will destroy the cancer in my body. Great idea. So why does Moderna say it's going to charge $500,000 for this?
And that's exactly what upsets me about this whole situation. Everyone praises it, and everyone is very happy with it. But in reality, I am very upset, irritated, and disappointed. I don't. Essentially, he goes on to say, "Oh, you know, government research funds went into this, and now the pharma companies are going to try to make $500,000 on one shot." By the way, that's not true, it's not just one injection.
But they're going to make $500,000, even though you can get the same thing for $50,000 because they just went through the FDA approval process. This looks like a regulatory takeover. They're just using the fact that they went through the process and no one else did, and that will allow them to rule, you know, 10 times more.
The problem is that he literally gets it wrong again, and again, and again, and again. And look, we can debate whether it is worth financing scientific programs from the state budget at all. Apparently, Donald Trump cut a lot of them. And, you know, they hold quite right-wing views here. So there have been a lot of cuts to the very government funding that they say is driving these innovations in cancer.
That's not the main purpose of this video, okay? The purpose of this video is not politics. This is just basic science. So, where is Friedberg wrong? He confuses how the two approaches to these peptides actually work. Let's figure this out. First of all, when we hear about peptides, there are so many of them, and I...
these are just five examples. Four of them are linked to cancer. By the way, if you want screenshots or additional information, you can find it or follow updates on the Meet Kevin app. It is completely free to download on Google Play or the Apple App Store. And if you download it, log in, and register, you can later go to app.mevin.com with the same login and use it on your computer.
But here's what you need to understand, okay? Peptides are now very widely used for many different purposes. There are so-called Joe Rogan wellness peptides . Okay, they're not for treating cancer, that's not what we're talking about here. Well, Eleusios is currently in the second phase of its anti-cancer peptide trials, but, you know, there are some mistakes in this study.
There's also Modi, uh, peptide development in phase 1/2, which is still at a very early stage. The bottom four and five points here are, first of all, irrelevant to this discussion. I say this because it's important not to confuse them with the Joe Rogan-style peptides that you hear about, which, you know, also have contamination issues and, in fact, some have even linked them to potentially accelerating cancer.
Very briefly about this. Uh, wellness peptides can activate your cells' repair so they grow faster, which is exactly what your body shouldn't be doing if it has mutations that could lead to cancer, right? This is not a discussion about whether you should use Joe Rogan's peptides. It's just a word. I just want you han what we are talking about here .
So, number two and number three, which is the combined neoantigen peptide and the peptide from Moderna in partnership with Merck. OK. So what's going on here and how does it work? The easiest way to explain this is to look at this board . There are these things in your body called dendritic cells. I may be pronouncing some of these names wrong.
I'm not a biologist, so I 'll just try to do the best I can, okay? There's this big red cell right here. Its job, essentially, is to look for foreign particles in your body and simply absorb them. The whole point of why it engulfs a potentially foreign cell, such as a virus - here you have to think about the mechanism of action - is that it engulfs the virus in order to read its DNA.
And then it puts out little proteins on the outside of its body, on the surface of this dendritic cell. This becomes a messaging tool . This is very important. We'll talk about that in a moment. But what Moderna did was say, " Hey, you know what? Why do n't we put special mRNA instructions hidden inside a bunch of lipids, like fats?" And these dendritic cells can take them in, digest them, then read those instructions and put them on the surface of their body right here like little signaling devices.
Of course? This is important because the process of this dendritic cell taking up all the mRNA is very different from just coming in and saying, "Hey , why don't we just inject the peptide directly?" Let's go, because if we inject the peptide directly, hey, maybe it'll just float on the outside, like this little green layer right here.
" But there's a huge problem with the assumption that you can just put in a peptide and it's going to work the same way . I'll explain that in a moment. But you also have to know that these instructions contain, and this will be important in the future, in the case of Moderna, about 32 instructions for mutations.
In the case of BioNTech, they contain about 18 to 20. This will become important in the future when I talk about mutations. These instructions are here. Very important. This is the process of personalizing cancer treatment for you. Okay. Hopefully not for you. For someone who has cancer, right? Okay.
So now you take this dendritic cell, and it's going to fold, you know, fold its proteins, whether it's ingested them or exposed to some peptides. And now here's where the huge difference comes in, okay? We're going to move this cell now. It's going to go do its job. It's going to go to the lymphatic system.
You know, like those lymph nodes that you feel on your the back of your head, in your groin, or under your armpits, right? These are lymph nodes. You should look up a graphic representation of the lymphatic system. I think it's pretty cool because, you know , we think of it as ... here, I'll do this.
We think of our arteries or, for example, our nerve pathways as systems in our body , but we forget that we have a whole network called the lymphatic system , and it's really the foundation of our immune system. So , uh, of course, the screen is not available. I hate it when that happens. Oh, that's it .
Choose. Choose. That's it. Okay. So you have all of this, and all of these little green circles here—these are lymph nodes. They're really important because they show how your spleen is part of the lymphatic system, and, you know, any other parts , in your throat or anywhere else, are part of that lymphatic system.
Okay, cool. So this cell now, this dendritic cell, I'll call it a D cell, so as not to confuse it with a T cell, goes into the lymphatic system. And that's where Friedberg makes a mistake. He makes such a terrible mistake. He's completely misleading his audience here. And it's a blatant lie. Okay. Dude, don't be so aggressive, but this is really bad.
Okay. When this dendritic cell shows up in your lymphatic system, it presents these folded proteins that it's made, the blue ones or the purple ones that we see here, to all the different activated class I and II immune cells. That's a very fancy way of saying that a much larger part of your immune system is activated than if you just had these little green activated peptides from the injection.
So I want you to think about this. See this character with this "Oh" look on his face right here? Okay. This is part of what's called the CD4- positive part of your immune system. They're activated by MHC class II molecules . And they're like the local city guard. So, to simplify it as much as possible.
Here's this little "O" face, okay? The local city guard. You have a lock, the city guard says, "Wow! This is not good. "Hey guys, watch out. Bad guys, watch out. Got it? This is very different from these angry soldiers. Angry soldiers are CD8- positive activated immune systems, MHC class I. Class I, they're hunters.
Think of the 300 Spartans, an incredibly brutal army. These guys are hunting internal threats. And these guys are only hunting small external threats. That's a big difference, because cancer that's spreading through your body, metastasizing, is an internal threat . You need hunters. Friedberg says, "If you can activate a city guard for $50,000, why spend $500,000?" Oh, pharma is a rip-off.
They are trying to fool you. "Which is a very popular thing to say, by the way, right? Like, it's very popular, and I get it, to be cynical about pharma just trying to rip you off. This isn't healthcare, this is ' disease healthcare.' Okay, okay, okay. Okay. Like, these kinds of debates are worth having, but that's such an oversimplification.
I think he's trying to irritate his audience into saying, 'Yeah, it's true.'" Big Pharma is trying to scam you again. "And he completely ignores that in this example, or in this peptide cleavage , the mRNA nanoparticle activates a whole army that actually reduces the risk of metastasis , that is, the spread of the cancer in the future, because the mechanisms in the body are completely different than in this mixed process with lower quality control, not FDA approved, that he's talking about.
And he's essentially saying that they're the same, when in fact they're not. And I think that's a big mistake by Friedberg and the All-In podcast. Now let's look at another little picture. Let's pin this down a little bit better, okay? The injectable versus the body-made version. The injectable version is an external army.
When you create the version inside the body, you activate, as it were, an external army and an army that acts from the inside. And as a result, you get over 59%, at least according to the trial data, less spread or less metastasis. Got it? That's just from the trial data. Results could be much better.
You know, these studies are pretty, relatively, new. A lot of this really started around 2022 with the Moderna process. And so we have this phase three trial, which is actually a real breakthrough. Moderna is not the only company doing this. It's also BioNTech. And now I'm going to explain mechanically why this mutation process works so well.
It also shows you why a company like BioNTech, which is doing some work on this with their 18-20 mutation drug, is still behind. They're in phase two trials. You should think of them as the second horse in this race. But why is this race so important? Friedberg is trying to convince you that this race doesn't matter .
But in fact, the race does matter, because this is a real breakthrough. It's really extremely important. But let's just get into the mutations for a moment . And I think this is kind of a background , and then I promise you'll have enough knowledge about biology for today. And I'm not saying I'm perfect.
I'm trying to simplify it so that we can understand it without trying to be smart and then get it wrong. Right? We're trying to simplify it so that it's understandable and we can learn the general concepts. Now, here's what's cool about these personalized vaccines or therapies. How it works: They basically remove part of your tumor, like through a biopsy or just ablation, right?
So they remove your cancer. The problem is , you probably haven't removed it completely. Those cells are still in your body, and if they mutate, they can spread to different parts of your body, potentially because they're now more resistant to your, you know, aggressive circulatory system or whatever, and then they end up somewhere else, causing brain cancer or lung cancer or something else.
You know, so skin cancer turns into another type of cancer, and that's really bad. Okay. So what they do, remember, BioNTech does, let's say, 20, and Moderna does about 32, okay? 32, I wrote down 33. That's it. Got it? They're going to use—and this iir algorithms and their weights to analyze the DNA sequence, well , all these little pieces and how they fit together, right ?
Okay. They're going to look for little critical elements for the survival of this tumor. And then, in addition to what parts we think are critical for the survival of the tumor, what parts we think or predict through AI or otherwise that will actually fold into a protein inside the cell into something that will actually work when it gets into the lymphatic system.
Remember that little outside part that I added to the dendritic cell, the thing that's perceived as, "Guys, I found a foreign invader. Look at this. Be please destroy this foreign invader, okay? And they put out some kind of protein instructions. Again, I'm oversimplifying here. They're using AI in part not only to figure out which parts might be critical to the tumor, but also to decide which ones are not only critical but also going to be able to go through the folding process and work effectively , so that the most aggressive cells say, "We're going to go for it.
We got it. We're going to hunt it down in different parts of your body." Mind you , this is not a case of you giving one shot and that's it . This is a therapy. It takes about 18 shots over the course of a year to really complete all of this training in your body. It takes a while, but then the result is considered relatively stable.
You know, the 5-year survival rates are much better. Although we haven't had many 5-year periods since this started working. So what's really interesting or unique is that cancer cells—it's a disaster. They're not very well regulated, and that's what makes them so dangerous. They mutate a lot. When you take this cut or this mutation and turn it into an instruction manual, what happens if a cancer cell says, "I'm only going to copy this part of the cancer, because that's who I am, and I don't need that part anymore." And it essentially turns into a different type of cancer cell.
Well, if you only target this one mutation, and the cancer cell mutates, it doesn't work, because this protein that's looking for the mutation does n't matter anymore because it does n't exist anymore. The cancer cell has escaped. Okay. So, adding 32 or 20 mutations here is like putting 32 or 18 different signals here.
And the army cells, your, you know, your T cells, they kind of say, "We got it." We'll find any freak that has at least one of those. So in other words, even if a cancer cell mutated 31 times out of 32, those cells would still be stuck with that one problem. They literally go to other cells in your body.
They're like, " Wait a minute." Do you have one of those 32? You're a dead man. They basically make the cell self-destruct. That's what they do. They're killers. And they'll basically stab them and kill them. It's oversimplified. And so that's what's so amazing about it. When you really understand it, you're like , "Oh my God, man." It's just incredible.
The problem is , before AI came along, it took about 60 days to just identify one mutation that scientists wanted to target that they thought would survive the folding of the protein. And if it got destroyed during folding or the cancer mutated, it didn't work. And then all this personalized therapy didn't work.
And then you know what? The patient dies because, you know, time is running out. It's horrible. Okay. Now, with AI, you can say, "Well, let's add 20." Let's add 32 or whatever. We can do it in a matter of hours. And that's the coolest thing about it. It's like, "Wow." It's amazing. The research, and this is what Friedberg also misses, and that's why I want to specifically talk about this AI section, is that the research, or what Friedberg suggests, is like, "Hey, this is just a process that anyone can do." It's nothing special.
Like, why should they make so much money off of this? Well, because it's not just a mechanism for how these proteins can fold up in your body and how it can then teach your lymphatic system to hunt down cancer, or in the case of Friedberg's example, you know, to recognize it locally, which is again a completely different type of peptide, right?
We were talking about it's in my articles somewhere here, but you get the point. Oh, there it is . You get the point, right? Friedberg's second point, it's very different from Moderna's version. Failure number one. It has a lot of failures. We don't have to list them all here. It's so cool, because when you get to that point, you're like, wait a minute.
So AI really speeds up this process, but AI is not just plugging in a chatbot, it's using your own data, your own weights, and your own settings to make it useful and valuable. That's what we do at our startup. Our startup, Reinvest, meetreinvest.com, we have a product called Homes AI for real estate.
And the question is, can I just plug this into a chatbot? No. That's been tried before. It does n't work, right? So you have to take the data, the human ingenuity to tweak the weights, and then do it over and over again, thousands, hundreds , millions of times using simulated or real data, to get a really durable product.
So for the sake of full transparency, we're still developing our real estate AI. I don't think it's great yet. I think it's not bad, but we're just getting started. And it's not getting better because the LLMs are getting better. It doesn't really matter. We barely use these LLMs. It's getting better as we train and tune our own weights, and that's a human-involved process.
I think the same is true for Moderna and the companies that are making these cancer vaccines. It's very different from just saying, "Oh, look, here's a company that took an existing process and is going to go through FDA trials with it, and therefore they deserve to explode in their market cap or something." I almost think David sounds like a short seller.
So that's my takeaway from all of this. You know, I have a very, very small stake in Moderna, BioNTech, and Eli Lilly. I want to make that clear. I'm not playing short, but the stake is so tiny that I don't think it's somehow influences my views. But I think it was worth saying. So who knows ? Maybe he's playing bearish and that's why he's pessimistic and maybe because I have this little piece of it, it influences me in some way.
I do n't think so. I'm personally very inspired. And I'm not encouraging you to invest in these stocks or anything. I'm just fascinated by the process, how these things actually differ and how it works in your body. Again , an army of 300 warriors versus a city guard. So you can get these images if you want on the Meet Kevin app.
Remember, it's a free app , and it's right there in the data tab. So if you need any of these images, or even want to go to the more complex ones like the ones I signed. You can take a look at those as well. I think they're very useful and informative. Get them for next time video. Goodbye and good luck. Why don't we spread the word about spread the word a little bit .
Comments 0