Things could still work out great for Mesoblast. I am a...

Things could still work out great for Mesoblast. I am a stockholder and want the best for us.

I see those things as platitudes. I think less big pharma influence is A GOOD THING. I have owned plenty of biotechs with promising treatments over the years only to watch as the FDA jerked them around, requiring trials after trials until they gave up or ran out of money. I don't want to see a return to that.

That being said, putting some lackeys in there who will approve any sort of nonsense isn't good either. During the Covid times, many people trumpeted the great curing ability of all sorts of medicine, many of which were proven to be harmful. So what we don't want are people who WILL APPROVE ANYTHING because if advances a message that they are open to new therapies.

We shouldn't forget that there are other companies out there who are working on therapies for the same indications that Mesoblast are working on. I know I wouldn't feel good if one of those companies got approval using SUSPECT trials, loose endpoints, weak p-values, suspect safety profile etc. What's good for the goose is also good for the gander. While we can celebrate a more open FDA, we surely know that the shareholders of every little biotech out there is celebrating. Mesoblast isn't alone in trying to bring new therapies to market.

As I am sure you are aware, any competing approvals for an indication we are seeking greatly reduces the market opportunity for Mesoblast, even if we have a superior product. We should want the FDA to be strict in their approvals, WHILE removing the influence of the entrenched influencers, namely big pharma. We shouldn't wish for the wild west, and I fear this health administration is moving a little too far towards wild west actions.