Frequency Therapeutics — Hearing Loss Regeneration

I would give these American biotech vultures a wide berth. I've just had an email from the University of Sheffield who are starting trials on progenitor cells in humans in 1-2 years, using cochlear implant patients for delivery. They have a company called Rinri Therapeutics, who will be involved. We generally don't do stock markets in the UK. It's a vulture class of doing people over, it seems.

You will not be aware of this as the University of Sheffield spend money on research and not slick PR, which has done many over and left them feeling foolish and licking their wounds.

Stick with universities and public funded biotechnology, not these brain washing biotechs floating on the stock market.

Only the University of Michigan has delivered anything of value.

Bury this thread...

 

Re: "Was @JohnAdams heavily invested in the company?"

A few clicks by some knowledgeable 'puter-finance-geek/nerd/punter [that shure ain't me] would answer the question as to how much stock he owned back then when he was blasting away at the unbelievers.

But I'm sure you've observed in day-to-day life. People can play a game for fun and it's just fun.

But once they put down some money... a dollar, 50 cents... sometimes their pride gets involved and it takes on an atmosphere that's much more serious. They don't want to appear to lose. Their self-image gets involved, maybe.

Just something to bear in mind in the entrepreneurial approach to biotech startups.

Am I knocking this method of solving the tinnitus/hearing problem? Well what else have we got?

 

Thanks, I still remember the one or two who notoriously disagreed with me in this thread earlier on (as I personally lost faith in this drug during the initial Phase 2 readout) but there is no point in a "told ya so" approach because we're all losers in the grand scheme of things with this involved - financially, mentally, physically etc

That and the fact the people who tried to stretch the reality and every outcome to date in relation to their hopeful thinking did also try a scientific, logical but mostly hypothesis based approach with their reasoning. So really it's all good.

I did, however, find the phase of this thread when people were completely disregarding audiograms altogether stupid and mostly just showed that there are a lot of people with manifestations of this condition without showing much for it on an audiogram. I think Frequency Therapeutics shifting the goal posts at one point regarding audiogram improvement expectations from this drug also made people think a certain way. Try having visible loss on an audiogram relating to your hearing loss/tinnitus that has worsened over time and you'll understand why audiogram results do matter.

 

'Hypothesis based approach'. I don't know where you pulled that. If you were to ask us whether the earth is flat or ball-shaped, I bet we could produce evidence equally scientific and logical in support of both hypotheses. Since we're now doing a 'hypothesis based approach'.

 

Exactly. At one point @JohnAdams posted a step-by-step method of his latest idea that could cure tinnitus that involved hanging upside down, putting a stent into one’s eardrum, and then putting Carrageenan into one’s middle ear. Now I know people are desperate, but you never know who is going to read that kind of stuff and actually follow through with it.



It’s scary looking back how he was encouraged to do this kind of crap. Some people treated his posts as legitimate science.

It’s more of a warning of not getting one’s hopes up based upon unproven methods of curing and/or treating tinnitus. However, it was so vitriolic back then that a told you so would be justified anyway.

 

FREQ scientists would have probably been able to figure out how to fix this if they hadn't laid them off and canceled the clinical trials.

Let's hope someone else can try it.

 

They saw audiogram improvements in their animal models.

 

My problem is why don't these biotechs ever have any backup solutions, like how come when these clinical trials fail, THEY FAIL. Like for GOOD. Why is there "no, oh look, hold up, let me change this and that (a process takes less than 3 months) and get back on the horse."

What I'm saying is why don't they ever anticipate failures and have immediate back up plans.

Anyway, I'm out this thread for good. Bye bye.

 

Lol, Ed!

Listen, if you want to talk bad about @JohnAdams when he's not here to defend himself, then that's you're right, and you should exercise it (but not really).

However, this post of his you're referencing is from MPP (the 4chan of Tinnitus Talk: whole point was to be more absurd/outrageous than the last person who posted; I find it hard to believe even you believe anyone would have taken anything posted in that thread seriously), so it's quite disingenuous of you to claim that @JohnAdams was pushing this as legit science.

Additionally, when he did make scientific posts outside of MPP that could be dangerous if tried, I think he pretty well explained it was purely hypothetical.

 

FREQ is dead, why bother even talk about them.

I lost $30,000 in their stock drop. Screw them...!

 

It's all about money. Each trial is extremely expensive and investors aren't going to keep throwing money at something that is repeatedly failing trials.

 

Oh dear! You're teasing us now. Like as if to say: "They would have cured tinnitus, old age, hearing loss, impotence... etc. etc. if they had not left out the one essential ingredient"... whatever that might be.

The main points are that they have called time out. Money all used up. And that the knowledge base, the know-how and expertise should get taken on by the research community so that with the next proposal the new people can "stand on the shoulders" of past research, to quote Isaac Newton, and that they may see a little further.

 

That is what is happening here hopefully:

Spiral Therapeutics Acquires Otonomy Assets to Boost Inner Ear Disorders Pipeline and Appoints Industry Leaders to Board

 

Why don't Frequency Therapeutics have the decency of at least open sourcing FX-322? That IP is worth shit. At least let other labs try it. I guess they also failed on the ethics trials.

 

I love all the extremely nonsensical wishful thinking in these forums.

Why would any company just give away their IP for free when there's a chance to sell it?

So many opinions in these types of threads are based off emotion instead of logic.

 

Would all of the FX-322 IP be owned by Astellas at this point?

 

Well, good luck trying to sell their failed drug. Tesla open sources tech and algorithms (that are probably worth more than everything Frequency Therapeutics has combined) because they have confidence so they don't give a shit. Reminds me of the "ahh but people will steal my brilliant idea!" founder archetype. Pathetic.

 

We live in a capitalist society. It is what it is.

 

A lot of people forget that 70% of the world aren't altruistic in nature.

 

A lot of it has to do with how desperate so many of us are for a miracle cure. I am guilty of it myself at times. It just clouds judgement.

At least that other company, Spiral Therapeutics, bought some of Otonomy's IP. The same could easily happen to FX-322.

There's no chance they're just going to give it away when they are already struggling for cash and on the brink of bankruptcy.

 

...100% of the US is. "We're #1!"

 

Wow. I can't believe this is how it ends. I opened this thread 7 years ago with lots of hope but was always cautious after the previous failures. I lost faith after the audiograms didn't pan out, but always held out hope.

 

At least some of the IP was conditionally licensed to Frequency Therapeutics by MIT. It may possibly revert to them. I don't know.

In this case, it was developed in university labs, funded by the taxpayer or charitable donations. That's one good reason. Assuming the IP is worth anything now.

Should probably have left the last word to you. Sorry!

 

@RB2014, this is why we must allow constructive criticism to flow. I'm not talking about frustrated comments putting everything down with no basis to the argument. I'm talking about looking objectively at early findings. Out of desperation we sometimes allow the bar to be set so low.

We must also temper the expectations on XEN1011 or the other potassium channel modulators in my opinion. The theory is OK, but they are not in trial for tinnitus, none of them!

People tend to attach themselves to a piece of research and then become defensive when challenged. Instead we should welcome the challenge and encourage it.

With proper debate and people freely allowed to critique, this thread would likely have not got blown out of proportion. It has had five times the interest of a treatment (Dr. Shore's device) that is progressing to market with solid science and results.

 

I strongly agree, and this goes for all discussions. We are all guilty of letting our biases cloud our judgement from time to time, and not one person here or anywhere else is innocent of this. It’s just human nature. This thread became very heated when someone had an alternative view, to the point that nobody wanted to hear anything other than praise for Frequency Therapeutics’ work. That drove away all the objective thinkers and left a vacuous echo chamber with little merit to what was being said.

Without some form of pushback, it’s very difficult to analyse the weight or significance of something that’s being said. Good data and solid arguments stand up to scrutiny, and the scrutiny should be welcomed because it’s what leads to a balanced debate with more robust ideas and outcomes.

If I had something that had the potential to change the world, and significant data to back up my claims, then I’d welcome all attempts to disprove/critique my evidence. It’s what good scientists and objective thinkers thrive on.

 

I'm actually glad you are still around and it is good to hear from you.

I just couldn't get excited over 5 dB when I am down 80 dB to 120 dB in most frequencies. Totally agreed with what you said though. Many people still clung to hope after the trials kept coming back disappointing. I was active in the Novartis thread before this and it dragged on for years with a similar outcome.

 

You might not realize this (or then again you might), but you could be willy-nilly castigating the method by which the knowledge revolution is going forward. In this particular case it's the academic - university - hospital method vs. the entrepreneur - private capital approach. This is by no means confined to medical matters. I'm sure you've noticed that there are three main operating systems/browsers: Microsoft & Edge, Apple & Safari and Linux & Mozilla Firefox. Oh yes! There's another one. Google Android, but I believe Android is based on the Unix model and so is Linux.

Many people here (including myself) are saying: "Hey You, Frequency Therapeutics! The least you could do is make your research and know-how open-source, so that Joe Soap and the volunteer/academic community can develop it, just like Linux was developed.

It doesn't take me to give the reply of the entrepreneur. There are much more articulate people on this thread than me.

I sure hope that there ain't no broken bones after this discussion. It's bound to get heated.

 

Do you think that with the advancement of artificial intelligence, tinnitus treatments and research will progress further in the coming years?

In particular, the development of molecules such as FX-322 which could have helped us.

 

Hopefully it does. I don't get why guys like Elon Musk want to put a 6 month ban on the development of AI though, but I guess if I leave my emotions aside and look at the long term, it might be to prevent jobs being taken over by AI. Maybe the dude just wants to put some safeguard over protecting people's jobs from AI. But yeah, all in all I do hope that AI speeds up research.

 

Everyday it is seeming more obvious, that AI is going to beat humans to the ball at figuring out tinnitus (except perhaps Dr. Shore), hearing loss, basically everything. It's easy to go down the rabbit hole with AI. But the fact is, GPT4 is something else, and it's going to get better at an exponential rate.

For the majority of people who aren't familiar with the term A.G.I (Artificial General Intelligence), it is basically the benchmark to which an AI is on the same level as human intelligence or higher. The predicated time of achieving AGI is continuously being pushed forward.

The AI Revolution: The Road to Superintelligence

Regardless of tinnitus, this is a must read for everyone. This is what the future is shaping up to look like.

Once we can achieve AGI, intelligence is a cheap commodity that almost shares the same price as electricity. So you could simulate 100, 1,000, 10,000, 100,000, etc (scale indefinitely) top level researchers, that would quite easily solve every problem humanity has (tinnitus). AGI could potentially self-improve itself at an extremely fast pace. So then you could have 6 digit IQ simulated researchers and scientists.

I have more faith in that AI will be first, considering that hearing drugs are still years away.