Whither ESG? The Curious Case of Pharma's Forgotten Acronym

Ah, ESG! Not long ago, you could hardly sip your oat milk latte—or endure a quarterly earnings call—without stumbling over this earnest little trio of letters. Environmental, Social, Governance: a veritable holy trinity promising to keep greedy corporations virtuous, polar bears suitably chill, and boardroom consciences cleaner than an antiseptic wipe. For pharmaceutical firms, ESG was particularly enticing: a balm for battered reputations, regulatory migraines, and shareholder scorn.

Yet, as quickly as it rose to corporate sainthood, ESG has seemingly exited stage left, discreetly packing its sustainably-sourced bamboo suitcase. By May 2025, it has become as unfashionable as dial-up internet. Why? Well, mainly due to a particularly American affliction—a lethal cocktail of politics and polemics. "Woke capitalism," critics cried, terrifying investors more than a roomful of healthcare lobbyists brandishing clipboards. Even ESG-friendly executives now dodge the term as if it were a subpoena from the Department of Justice.

But let’s refrain from mourning ESG’s sudden demise too loudly, lest we awaken the auditors. Instead, let’s pivot optimistically (as this author must occasionally do, despite a predilection for pessimism) toward a superior and far more entertaining alternative: venture philanthropy.

Unlike ESG’s vague moralizing—often as substantial as a gluten-free muffin—venture philanthropy blends the ruthless clarity of a hedge fund manager with the empathetic soul of a seasoned charity worker. Consider, if you will, the formidable Cystic Fibrosis Foundation (CFF). With financial acumen sharper than a freshly sterilized scalpel, this nonprofit poured roughly $150 million into cystic fibrosis treatments, subsequently reaping a jaw-dropping $3.3 billion return through royalty rights alone. Such vast sums were swiftly redirected into further research and patient support rather than executive perks or private jets—luxuries charities typically eschew, albeit reluctantly.

The beauty of venture philanthropy is its ability to elegantly marry moral outcomes with financial sensibility. It effortlessly demonstrates that "doing good" and "doing well" aren’t merely cohabitants—they’re inseparable, bickering yet deeply affectionate bedfellows. Take Italy’s Telethon Foundation, which has audaciously taken on the role of a biotech company. With financial prospects for gene therapies evaporating quicker than champagne at a pharmaceutical gala, Telethon courageously rescued abandoned treatments such as the gene therapy Strimvelis for the ultra-rare ADA-SCID, despite initially bleeding euros faster than a failing startup burns investor patience. Their goal? Break-even, sustainable medicine delivery—no more, no less—thus sparing crucial treatments from languishing like forgotten novels in a dusty library【14†source】.

Yet, for this patient-investor hybrid model to truly flourish, perceptions of patients themselves must shift radically—from passive recipients of charity to active, informed stakeholders wielding genuine influence. This shift involves not only financial muscle but intellectual and strategic input, replacing the outdated paradigm of patient advocacy as mere moral cheerleading with genuine seat-at-the-table decision-making.

Indeed, conscious capitalism—ESG’s more relaxed and practical cousin—illustrates beautifully that profits and social purpose can coexist comfortably, even thrive harmoniously. Historically relegated to the sidelines, patient organizations now possess substantial clout, financing research, sharing in financial upside, and ensuring patient priorities aren’t casually discarded in pursuit of quarterly profits.

Enter my own humble initiative, Capital for Cures, born precisely as an antidote to endless meetings full of empty calories and emptier rhetoric. This model deftly connects pragmatic corporate interests with heartfelt philanthropic missions, bridging biotech startups, venture capitalists, and patient advocates. The aim? Financial returns, certainly—but equally, meaningful societal impact. Capital for Cures transforms patients into informed investors and investors into genuine stakeholders of the public good. It is exactly this synergy between innovation, empathy, and profitability that inspired this author to found Capital for Cures in the first place.

So, where exactly has ESG vanished to? Not terribly far, truth be told—it’s merely evolved into something sharper, smarter, and infinitely more palatable. Venture philanthropy and conscious capitalism quietly stepped into ESG’s vacated shoes, vividly proving profits and altruism aren’t just compatible—they’re synergistically enriching.

In summary, ESG might now be sliding discreetly off corporate PowerPoint decks, but its core principle—that ethical conduct and financial success can coexist—is alive and thriving. And that, dear reader, is precisely what Capital for Cures champions: converting noble aspirations into sustainable achievements. After all, in biotech—as in life—it’s never too late for a graceful pivot toward doing good, and doing it remarkably well.