The Problem with Moonshots in Biotech: Big Promises, Bigger Problems

Moonshot thinking—a buzzword beloved by tech moguls and governments alike—has long dominated discussions in fields like AI and space. The idea is straightforward: set an audacious goal, throw money at it, and let innovation take care of the rest. But in biotech, moonshots often feel less like the triumph of ambition and more like a gamble where the odds are stacked against you. Can we cure cancer with $1 billion? Can $100 million unlock the secrets of Alzheimer’s? The uncomfortable truth is that money alone doesn’t solve biology’s complexities.

Moonshots in Biotech: An Uphill Battle

The Biology Problem

Unlike tech, where progress often scales predictably, biotech is governed by the chaos of biology. The human body doesn’t care about your deadline or budget. Moonshots like curing Alzheimer’s or reversing aging aren’t just difficult—they’re poorly understood. Even unlimited funds can’t overcome fundamental gaps in knowledge.

Example: Alzheimer’s Moonshots Gone Bust
Since 2022, high-profile failures in Alzheimer’s research have underscored the challenge of moonshot projects. Roche’s gantenerumab and Biogen’s aducanumab, touted as game-changers, both flopped spectacularly in clinical trials. Despite billions in funding and years of research, the biology of Alzheimer’s remains elusive.

Money ≠ Progress

Google X, the moonshot factory responsible for self-driving cars and internet balloons, famously declared its mission to tackle "10x problems." But its biotech forays have been underwhelming. Calico, Google’s anti-aging initiative, launched with over $1 billion in funding in 2013, has yet to deliver meaningful results a decade later. The issue isn’t ambition or funding—it’s that biology moves at its own pace.

Why Tech-Style Moonshots Fail in Biotech

1. Lack of Feedback Loops

In tech, failure is a learning experience. Build a bad app, and you can release a new version in months. In biotech, failure often takes years and hundreds of millions of dollars to reveal itself—leaving little room for iteration.

Example: Vaccines Beyond COVID-19
While the COVID-19 vaccine race was heralded as a biotech moonshot success, attempts to replicate that speed in other areas have struggled. Moderna and BioNTech have both poured billions into mRNA platforms for cancer and rare diseases, but clinical results since 2022 have been slow and mixed.

2. Overemphasis on Big Bets

Moonshots often come at the expense of incremental progress. While flashy projects attract funding, smaller, more achievable goals—better delivery mechanisms, improved diagnostics—go underfunded.

Example: Neglect of Antibiotics
Since 2022, investment in antibiotic R&D has dwindled despite the looming threat of antimicrobial resistance. Instead, venture capital and government grants have chased moonshots in cancer and gene therapy, leaving essential but unglamorous fields like antibiotics starved of resources.

Can Money Solve Biotech’s Problems?

Throwing $1 billion at a problem might work in fields like AI, where scaling compute power can yield breakthroughs. In biotech, however, the results are less predictable.

Prize-Based Approaches

Could prizes—like the $10 million XPRIZE—work for biotech? Historically, they’ve had limited success. A 2023 review of biotech prizes found that while they stimulate innovation, they rarely lead to commercial breakthroughs. The economics of drug development—multi-billion-dollar costs and uncertain returns—make prizes insufficient on their own.

Example: Cancer Moonshot 2.0

Former President Biden’s "Cancer Moonshot" initiative relaunched in 2022 with ambitious goals to halve cancer deaths by 2047. While the program has driven collaborations and modest advancements, critics argue it lacks the focus and funding needed to address cancer’s underlying biological complexity.
Source:

Are Moonshots Dead in 2025?

Moonshots in biotech aren’t dead—but they’re being redefined. The sector is learning to balance ambition with realism. Instead of single-handedly curing cancer, the focus has shifted toward platforms that enable broader progress, like mRNA or CRISPR.

The Middle Ground: Platform Technologies

Companies like Intellia and Beam Therapeutics are taking a platform approach, developing tools like base editing or delivery systems that can be applied across diseases. These aren’t "cure-all" moonshots, but they’re transformational in their own way.

The Verdict: Moonshots Need a Reality Check

Moonshots in biotech aren’t inherently bad—they push boundaries and inspire progress. But they also risk becoming a distraction, funneling resources into big ideas that fail to deliver while leaving smaller, vital projects underfunded. Biotech doesn’t need to abandon moonshots—it needs to rethink them.

The next time someone proposes a billion-dollar prize to "cure" aging or Alzheimer’s, ask this: Do we understand the biology? Are the tools ready? And if it fails, what’s the backup plan? Without these answers, moonshots are less about innovation—and more about shooting blanks.