Gm! Peace in the Middle East. âđ˝
[Welcome to Issue Number 41 of The House Brazeryen, where we break down the latest #startup, #biotech, and #ScientistCEO-related news for you fortnightly, in roughly 5 minutes. Brought to you by Brazen Capital and brainsurgerydropout.]
Was this forwarded to you? Mash this subscribe button, homie.
RE: Failed Academic = Nobel Laureate?
by Shawn Carbonell, MD, PhD â The come-from-behind story of Nobel laureate Katalin KarikĂł should not be surprising to anyone who has hands-on experience in âBig Academiaâ. The luxury journal, Nature, rejected her legendary 2005 paper with Weissman for being an âincrementalâ advance. The same university that demoted her several times for failing to win grant funding is now taking credit for The Prize.
âI realized at an early age not everybody is rooting for me. I was forced to be the best."
âKatalin KarikĂł
Welcome to The Academical Matrix
Itâs not that Big Academia is inherently evil, itâs just that the system is basically a simulation⌠driven by metrics that donât matter much to the objective practice of actual science or the advancement of knowledge and technology/medicine.
These metrics, including luxury journal publications and grant funding (both gatekept by the power hungry Volturi), lead to the politicization of science andâfranklyâa ton of bullshit and bad behavior of varying degrees⌠a realization that can often extinguish the creative scientific flames of graduate students early on in their career.
They take the blue pill.
âYou have to be curious and question everything."
âKatalin KarikĂł
Red pill, please.
I was an undergrad when I had my first jarring glimpse of The Academical Matrix. We published results the leading laboratory in the field argued (in a previous paper) was not possible. For years, I was ignored at national conferences by them and their cronies who represented the conference leadership.
Initially, I was confused. Then I got pissed.
It gave me a chip on my shoulder that drove me to work harder and question existing dogmas in my field. So much so that Iâstill a pre-med at the timeâwas invited to debate a full professor at a 1994 international conference. Sadly, the professor was a last-minute no show (lol!). I donât blame him⌠debating an undergraduate was likely a lose-lose proposition. [I still vividly remember calling up my PI from the hotel afterwards. He exclaimed victory and we had a good laugh.]
Becoming a walking science reviewer definitely did not make me popular among certain faculty as a graduate student. In fact, my department chair and one of my own committee members (predictably) turned on me early in my dissertation years. In one instanceâwhere I probably should have used more restraintâI publicly challenged my chairmanâs career hypothesis with contradictory data from my undergrad work. Rather than engage me in a lively debate in front of the entire graduate class he immediately stared at meâfuriousâand barked, âWhatâs your POINT, Shawn?â
It was a crash course in incentives. These profs know where/how they get their bread buttered. At that moment, every grad student in the department did too.
And, no, I didnât try to remove the ornery committee member. Turns out when you work in the lab day and night and do good science you can let the haters hate, dunk on them with solid data, and crush your PhD in 3.5 years. [Massive thanks to my non-ornery advisors, BTW.]
BRAZEN BREAKDOWN
The point of this isnât to equate my Big Academia struggles with that of a bad ass Nobel laureate. It is to illustrate that as long as insecure humans are still in charge EVERYONE will struggle in Academe (until the robots take over).
The good news⌠not every faculty member is an Agent. There ARE gems out there fighting the good fight⌠otherwise I wouldnât have remained training in academia for TWO DECADES. I was fortunate to have found fantastic mentors as an undergrad and graduate student and they changed my life. For those of you struggling in The Academical Matrix, this is my best advice: be weary of big names and fame whores⌠find a kind PI with integrity, question dogma, work your ass off, and have fun.
[And remember: YOU are the CEO of your dissertation.]
Brazen Capitalâs Fourth Investment: drĹŤl
by Brazen Capital â This investment is super special to us for many reasons. First, it was originally sourced by one of our Junior Venture FellowsâLiam Lewisâa rockstar grad student at Duke University. Second, it is on-thesis in that the founders are scientists and Brazen Capital wrote the first investor check in. Finally, our co-GP Monica Berrondo, PhD previously mentored them through Nucleate.
drĹŤl (pronounced âdroolâ, duh) allows users to get a snapshot of their oral health and provides guidance to improve their oral microbiome with a simple saliva sample. Our entire team (Liam, Katie, Alex, Monica, and Shawn) were interested in backing this startupâcofounded by CEO, Brent Ifemembi, and CTO, Nelson Ndahiroâafter the lively first meeting.
Most people typically go to the dentist when they have an annual checkup or after experiencing an oral health issue. However, with drĹŤl, users get the chance to monitor and manage their oral microbiome before issues arise. Although they are initially focusing on cavities and gum disease, Brent and Nelson have plans to expand the drĹŤl detection platform to other oral health indications.
BRAZEN BREAKDOWN
Why are Brent and Nelson uniquely qualified to tackle this issue? Are they gunner dental students who saw the unmet need through treating patients in the clinic? No! In fact, they are both senior Ph.D. candidates in Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering at Johns Hopkins University whose projects have nothing to do with teeth!
They sought to solve this problem based on their own traumatic dental ordeals when they were younger. Their engineering expertise, particularly their valuable experience with microfluidic systems, are a major leg up. They are passionate about addressing this often-ignored space to ensure that more patients are getting the care they need to improve oral health.
Check out drĹŤl on LinkedIn and WWW. drĹŤl is seeking intros to multi-office dental practices and DSOs nationally. If you wanna help (or join their waitlist), reach out!
VC CORNER: Negotiating Control
by Scott Alpizar, PhD â Weâve worked through general strategy, option pools, and valuations so far on this term sheet negotiation journey. But perhaps the most important clauses to know are those that affect what you can or cannot do with your own company.
Control rights typically refer to an investorâs right to control (or at the very least direct) the major decisions and general direction of the company. Theyâre usually intended to ensure their investments remain on the right track. While some terms are standard, you should still understand how they can influence your company.
Letâs break them down!
BRAZEN BREAKDOWN
Two main things to look for are the makeup of the Board of Directors (BOD), and the Voting Rights and Protective Provisions.
Board of Directors. As an officer of the company, you answer to a BOD, whose job is to oversee strategic direction and governance. Initially after an investment, a common BOD makeup is three members: one investor representative and two founder/common stock representatives. This allows the founders to retain BOD control.
Numbers can certainly vary though, sometimes including an even number of investor and founder seats plus an independent member. In this situation it is much easier to lose control of your companyâand potentially your jobâsince youâre no longer in full control and can therefore be fired! The BOD also has potential influence over hiring and firing key personnel as well as vesting provisions, other important items. At early stages, it's fair to have BOD structure that reflects the ownership on your cap table.
Protective Provisions/Voting Rights. There are certain corporate actions that investors may obtain veto rights over via a set of protective provisions. Some definitely make sense, but others can limit your ability to raise funds or sell the company. Some of these rights can extend to other major decisions in your startup including hiring and firing key personnel (like the BOD) or changing the business model.
Look hard at these terms and understand that they may not always be direct. One that tripped me up when I first saw a term sheet was that instead of simply saying âyou canât have a financing without our approvalâ it will say something like âyou canât issue new stock without our approvalâ or â you canât amend the certificate of incorporation without our approvalâ. I know Iâve been saying this a lot lately, but if in doubt, check with your lawyer!
Again, some of these terms are standard/common and shouldnât be taken as malicious. But they are all extremely important and you should do your best to negotiate them to a place that aligns with your vision for your company.
đ BRAZEN SNAX
đ Neuroscientists identify a sixth basic taste: Scandinavian
âď¸ 40 million years of primate masturbation, autobiographical
đ Best Buy to market their first prescription medical devices: CGM
â ď¸ New paradigm-shifting research on the pandemic⌠of 1918!!!
đ CRISPR chickens: recipe for future flu pandemic or more delicious wings?
𧏠Approved rare disease gene therapy dropped 2x by pharma. Now what?
đ Cardiologist Eric Topol considers waiting for Novavax booster over mRNA
đđž Defining what a good death is & what a meaningful, satisfying life should be
đŚ Re-refresh your supply of FREE COVID tests (thank you regulatory capture)
â° TikTokCrak: UPenn fucked up (Nobel edition)
đŞ CARVEOUT
Kati KarikĂłâs book âBreaking Through: My Life in Scienceâ just came out TODAY!!!!
đđ˝ A DOSE OF GRATITUDE
We are grateful for Nobel laureates who were never tenured Ivy League professors, never won an NIH R01 grant, and kept doing risky science anyway⌠all while raising a child who eventually became a two-time Olympic gold medalist.
đ BRAZEN MEME
âď¸ FEEDBACK
Leave a comment and letâs continue the conversation on LinkedIn:Â @brazencapital