Funding for COVID-19 Projects

In one sentence

To effectively combat a pandemic, resources should be diverted toward engineering-based production (ventilators/masks) and "non-Big Pharma" research (novel therapeutics and drug repurposing) rather than competing with established pharmaceutical giants.

Why read this (and who it's for)

This post serves as a strategic roadmap for founders and researchers seeking to align their projects with high-impact funding opportunities. It solves the problem of "noise" in the pandemic response by identifying exactly where the author's capital and attention are focused. After reading this, you will be able to categorize your project as either an "Engineering" or "Scientific" problem and determine if it fits into the specific "Big Pharma" gap Altman is looking to fill.

The big idea

The central thesis of the text is that the COVID-19 response requires a strategic prioritization of Engineering over Science for certain types of production. While the world focuses on the "discovery" of new medicines, Altman argues that the immediate bottleneck for items like ventilators and masks is not a lack of scientific knowledge, but a lack of production capacity. Because these are engineering problems, they can be solved through "repurposing and creativity" rather than years of laboratory breakthroughs.

Furthermore, Altman argues for a "contrarian" approach to pharmaceutical research. He is not looking for the next incremental improvement on what Big Pharma is already doing. Instead, he is seeking "Novel" approaches—specifically those that are too unconventional or niche for large corporations to pursue. By focusing on Drug Repurposing (using what we already know) and Novel Therapeutics (doing what others won't), he aims to create a bifurcated strategy: one that scales existing knowledge and one that explores the extreme fringes of possibility.

Key ideas

Engineering vs. Science

• What it is — The distinction between a problem that requires a new discovery (Science) and a problem that requires a new way to build/scale (Engineering).
• Why it matters — If you identify a problem as an engineering one, you can move much faster. You don't need to prove a new biological principle; you need to find a way to manufacture at scale.
• In the book — Altman notes that producing ventilators and masks is "an engineering problem not a scientific ones," implying that the solution lies in creative repurposing of existing manufacturing lines.

Drug Repurposing

• What it is — The process of screening existing, approved drugs to see if they are effective against a new pathogen.
• Why it matters — It bypasses much of the safety and regulatory hurdles of "new" drugs because the safety profile of the drug is already established.
• In the book — Altman explicitly lists "Screening existing drugs for effectiveness" as a primary area of interest for funding.

The "Big Pharma" Gap

• What it is — Identifying research areas that are ignored by large pharmaceutical companies because they are too small, too risky, or too unconventional.
• Why it matters — It allows for a "Blue Ocean" strategy where startups can thrive without competing for the same resources as multi-billion dollar corporations.
• In the book — Altman seeks "Novel approaches to vaccines" and "Novel therapeutics that the big pharma companies are unlikely to work on."

Direct Communication over Spreadsheets

• What it is — A shift from passive, public-facing data collection to active, private communication.
• Why it matters — In a high-velocity crisis, a spreadsheet is a bottleneck. Direct communication (email) allows for a more nuanced, rapid vetting of projects.
• In the book — Altman admits the public spreadsheet "didn't work that well" and explicitly requests that people "please email me instead."

The Humanized ACE2 Model

• What it is — A specific technical requirement for a "viral challenge" against SARS-CoV-2.
• Why it matters — It identifies a specific technical "blocker" for startups: the need for a reliable animal model to test viral interaction.
• In the book — Altman asks for a "contract research company that can run a viral challenge against SARS-CoV-2 in a humanized ACE2 animal model."

Frameworks & tools

The Altman Funding Filter

Use this to determine if your project is a candidate for his specific funding interests:

1. Identify the Bottleneck: Is the problem a lack of testing (which he believes will be solved) or a lack of production?
2. Categorize the Problem Type: Is it a Scientific discovery (New) or an Engineering challenge (Scale/Repurpose)?
3. Analyze the Competition: Is Big Pharma already working on this? If yes, is your approach "Novel" enough to be different?
4. Determine the Intervention: Does your project fall into one of these four buckets?
   • Rapid Production (Ventilators/Masks)
   • Drug Repurposing (Existing drugs)
   • Novel Vaccines (Non-Big Pharma)
   • Novel Therapeutics (Non-Big Pharma)

Memorable examples & stories

The Ventilator/Mask Production

Altman frames the production of PPE and ventilators as an engineering problem. The lesson here is that during a crisis, the solution is often "repurposing and creativity" rather than waiting for a scientific breakthrough.

The Humanized ACE2 Animal Model

Altman mentions a specific need for a "viral challenge" in a humanized ACE2 animal model. This highlights the importance of identifying specific, technical "missing links" in a startup's path to success.

The "Stay Home" Mandate

Altman concludes with the simplest, most fundamental solution: "the best thing to do is still to get people to stay home." The lesson is that while funding and innovation are vital, they are secondary to basic public health measures.

Key quotes

"Producing a lot of ventilators or masks/gowns very quickly... is an engineering problem not a scientific ones." Why it matters: It defines the difference between "discovery" and "deployment."

"Novel approaches to vaccines (i.e., not doing what the big pharma companies are already doing)." Why it matters: It highlights the importance of finding "unclaimed" territory in research.

"I think we will soon have enough testing capacity, so now I’d like to start funding more startups working on..." Why it matters: It signals a shift in priorities from detection to production and treatment.

How to apply it

This week

• Audit your project: Determine if your current bottleneck is "Scientific" (we don't know how) or "Engineering" (we know how, but we can't build it fast enough).
• Identify the "Big Pharma" Gap: Look at the current news cycle. What is Big Pharma not doing? That is where the opportunity lies.

Ongoing

• Prioritize Repurposing: Whenever possible, look for ways to use existing drugs or existing manufacturing lines before trying to invent something entirely new.
• Direct Outreach: When seeking funding or partnerships in high-pressure environments, skip the public "sign-up" sheets and go directly to the decision-maker.

Common pitfalls

• The Testing Trap: Many people assume the primary bottleneck is testing. Altman explicitly states that testing capacity will be sufficient soon, so focusing there is a waste of resources.
• The Spreadsheet Trap: Do not rely on public spreadsheets to get noticed; they are inefficient for high-priority, high-speed funding.
• Competing with Giants: Do not try to out-spend or out-research Big Pharma on their own turf. Focus on the "Novel" and "Unlikely" niches.

Connects to

• Rapid Response Funding: The idea of deploying capital specifically to solve immediate, time-sensitive bottlenecks.
• Engineering-Led Innovation: The principle that many "scientific" problems are actually just "scaling" problems in disguise.

If you remember only three things

• Engineering > Science: For production (masks/ventilators), focus on repurposing and scale, not new discovery.
• The Big Pharma Gap: Look for "Novel" therapeutics that large corporations are ignoring.
• Repurposing is a Superpower: Screening existing drugs is a high-leverage way to find immediate treatments.

Internalize it

• Reflection questions
  • Is my current project a "Scientific" problem or an "Engineering" problem?
  • If I were to strip away the "Big Pharma" influence, what would be the most radical, non-traditional way to treat this disease?
  • How can I "repurpose" an existing solution to solve a current bottleneck in my work?
• Flashcards Q: What is the difference between a scientific problem and an engineering problem in the context of ventilators? A: A scientific problem requires a new discovery; an engineering problem requires repurposing and creativity to scale production. Q: What are the four specific areas Altman is interested in funding? A: 1. Ventilator/Mask production, 2. Drug screening/repurposing, 3. Novel vaccines, 4. Novel therapeutics. Q: Why did Altman suggest moving away from the public spreadsheet? A: Because it "didn't work that well" for direct, efficient communication. Q: What is the "Big Pharma" strategy for funding? A: To find "Novel" approaches that Big Pharma is "unlikely to work on." Q: What is the fundamental public health advice provided? A: The best thing to do is still to get people to stay home.

Fidelity note

Confidence: High. This summary is based strictly on the provided blog post. Because the source material is a short announcement rather than a dense book, the "Big Ideas" and "Frameworks" are derived from the specific categories and distinctions Altman makes (Engineering vs. Science, Big Pharma vs. Novelty). There is no information regarding his specific investment criteria beyond the categories listed.