On the GLP-1's amazing results on diabetes, for sure, but also on obesity. Lily became a trillion-dollar company. It's the first pharma company because of weight loss. And now all the biotech and pharma industry is waking up and it's like, wow, there is a lot of money in vanity, in consumer biotech. And here we are.
About AI in drug development. How much is the noise versus sigma?
Like it's going to be extremely speeding up pre-clinical development. You still have to go through the clinical stages. AI can smoothen things but not dramatically reduce it. There is a lot of people who believe, oh wow, from finding a drug till approval, it's now just a year. And obviously that's not going to happen. Unfortunately, we live in a society where we kind of glorify sleep deprivation. If an investment banker tells me, 'Oh, I'm working on a deal for you and I did an all-nighter,' I was like, 'No, you practically your IQ is like as if you're super drunk. Go home and sleep.'
You have new to a new episode. I'm your host, Phillip, and on the Flood Bio Show, I'm interviewing the best Europeans in biotech to help you grow. Christian Angermayer is one of the most unusual European investors in biotech. He has successfully invested in consumer biotech, human enhancement, psychedelics, longevity, but also invests across a very large range going from crypto, tech, media, and even natural resources. And he's a billionaire at 48 and starting from basically nothing. We have been in touch for a few years, but I had never talked with him live. So, it's a pleasure to sit down with him and to have him on the show. We caught up online while he was somewhere next to a stunning lake in Europe. We talked about his biotech investment but with a scientific, clinical and drug development angle. We also talked about contrarian things that seem completely crazy at the beginning but are quite obvious in hindsight. So here's my conversation with Christian, and please hit the like, follow or subscribe button if you're enjoying it.
All right, welcome to the show.
Yeah, it's cool. Um, like I mean and I've seen that you went on quite a lot of podcasts recently, but I didn't see one that is more like drug development biotech one.
Yeah. The last weeks we had, I mean last months, there was obviously we had enhanced games and sort of there was a lot of interest in that and yes, but it's always more around the sport side, always a little bit of biotech. So very happy to dive deeper into biotech.
That's cool. And I want to really start with consumer biotech. I mean, like Mounjaro, Zepbound. I mean, for the audience, bestselling drugs ever now, like 37 billion last year, ahead of cancer drugs I think. And what's crazy with the consumer biotech angle is that 50% of the intake is consumers. So basically non-medical use. So I'm wondering just to start, how do you look at it?
Well yeah, so by the way, I think it's in the meantime even more. I think it's more than 50%, and I would not call it non-medical use because that sounds so experimental. It's kind of medical. You get it from your doctor but it's called off-label. So meaning people don't use it for the indication which Mounjaro or whatever was originally developed for. Because as a reminder, I think actually not a lot of people even know that because they call it the weight loss drugs. But the drugs are clinically medically approved still for diabetes. That's where they're coming from. These are originally diabetes drugs. And then for really heavily obese people, for clinically obese people. And then people figured out, well, but why do I need to be clinically obese? For example, I'm on a GLP-1. I'm hopefully not clinically obese, but for me, I call it outsourced discipline. Because I'm a stress eater. And even if it's good stress, but when I'm fully immersed in my job, which I'm most of the time, then oh my god, there is a cookie and there is this and I'm hungry. And so I normally gain weight actually when things are going because then I'm really busy. And that just shuts down that thinking of food. So anyway, more than 50% are like me. They're taking these GLP-1s to lose weight. But from a medical sense, they don't need it. So it's called off-label, still medical use.
But like not for the originally intended indications, and I think that is only the first one. I was always super happy at the moment about the topic because since I started biotech 28 years ago, which makes me super old, I started my first biotech company. The very first thing I did was asking all these scientists I was meeting, 'Oh my god, what can I do back then with 20 to either age slower or to be more concentrated?' For me, it was always very normal that when you have access to all these top scientists in the world, you ask them how can I improve myself. And it was a big no-go. The entire pharma and biotech industry was only focused on curing diseases. They were disregarding consumer biotech, and it was seen as dodgy. But now thanks to weight loss drugs, people are waking up to the huge business. I always told my colleagues, 'Luckily not everybody is sick, but everybody has something you want to improve.' The market is much bigger than the market for cancer. And now all the biotech and pharma industry is waking up to the money in vanity and consumer biotech.
Amazing. Topics you talked about from your personal career to psychedelics. I want to take a bit more the challenging angle. One thing I researched is on the GLP-1s. The clinical trial results are amazing on diabetes and obesity, but in a non-medical setting, it's less clear. How do you respond to that?
I can tell you. I'm not fully sure, but I guess they must have done studies. My N of one: I'm on a GLP-1. I started in January and lost more than 10 kilos. It works. Side effects are well documented and don't really change if you're obese or normal weight. These drugs have been on the market for a long time, so we know the side effects. Off-label use should happen with a doctor. I'm a huge fan of using medications to improve yourself, but it must be within the medical system.
I like that. On the off-label use, your approach is very rigorous. But some people take shortcuts. How do you see that?
As long as these drugs are prescription drugs, which I advocate for, you have to go to a doctor. Even with tele health, it's a sufficient hurdle. People can always game the system, but that's humanity. Compare to alcohol, which is much worse. I'm on a conquest against alcohol; it's the most dangerous drug. I would limit all recreational drugs to a prescription. My view is educated consent: freedom without knowledge is not real freedom. So I believe in having a doctor in between.
I kind of push back on alcohol, but I almost cut it out in 2020. It's been five years now. There are positive effects.
Yeah. It's crazy how you don't realize some side effects until you stop. I'm completely against weed legalization; it's very bad. I would limit all substances under 21 because the brain is not fully developed. I never did recreational drugs until coffee at 29.
Yeah, I was pushing back, but now I'm sharing experience. One thing that puzzled me is the scientific study on alcohol. I think there are studies that contradict David Nutt's ranking.
I think there is nothing that can contradict how bad alcohol is. You can debate the ranking, but alcohol will always be one of the worst drugs.
Yeah. On consumer biotech, physical effects are measurable, but mental effects are harder. Some drugs like testosterone have more serious risks. How do you approach that?
It always comes back to first knowing what you want to achieve. Then consult with a doctor, understand risks, and monitor. I started testosterone replacement therapy 18 years ago, accepting the risk of dependence. I have no problem taking it for life. It turned out I'm lucky; my body didn't react. Most people are in the middle group. The key is to monitor and adjust.
I went deep into optimizing myself, always starting with fundamentals like sleep, exercise, nutrition. Then adding supplements and off-label drugs. I took a cautious approach. Some people take shortcuts and neglect basics, which can have serious side effects.
Yes, I don't know how people neglect the basics. The 80/20 rule: the 20% of enhancements only make sense if you do your basics right. Sleep is non-negotiable. We glorify sleep deprivation, but an all-nighter makes your IQ like a super drunk person. Go home and sleep.
I'm still on US time zone, came to bed late and I was like, hey, as much as I love this podcast with you, I'm not waking up with an alarm clock. That is one of my basic rules in life. I can afford it, so to say.
I haven't put an alarm clock since 2019.
It's a most healthy thing to do and I know it's a luxury by the way. But for example, I know I'm traveling a lot through time zones, which is already not good, and I have to do it because of how my life is structured. I know I need to be more obsessed with the other points of sleep so that I'm not waking up with an alarm clock. But sleep we could go for an hour in sleep only. The second one by the way super important is social relations. You need to have family and friends.
Live longer and everybody was like oh my god what is in red?
What's the name, the molecule in the red wine?
They were thinking it was resveratrol, yeah.
Exactly, it was debunked completely.
Debunked completely because there is nothing good in red wine.
But the question was asked in a way that people who only drink two or three glasses of red wine per week are the people who usually drink it with friends. So there wasn't sort of an implicit correlation. That shows the trickiness of studies. The outcome is alcohol is toxic, but if it is the social smoothe you need to have a great social life, then the tradeoff is worth it because having a social life adds so much more to your life. But that's very hard to measure from a biomarker.
I mean it's harder at least.
