Former CEO @NimbusTx. Board member at multiple companies helping teams discover & develop new medicines for patients. Any tweets are solely my own views.

Joined December 2014
I've always enjoyed studying the history of drug R&D, and to share a small snapshot of one perspective on @ldtimmerman's podcast was quite humbling. I submit for your 1.25-1.5x listening pleasure a small piece of the @NimbusTx story (along with some personal early career stories)
Nimbus CEO @jebkeiper joined @Ldtimmerman’s Long Run podcast to share personal insights on the Nimbus story from our computational beginnings 14 years ago, through the Takeda acquisition of our allosteric TYK2 inhibitor, and what our next chapter holds. apple.co/3Hj4D3X
14
7
119
14,471
My scary classroom social experiment demonstrating how tyrannies arise from democracies: I gave a bunch of extra credit tickets to the first few students to arrive in class, then everyone else received 1-2 tickets. The kids that came into class last were outraged by the “injustice” of those that came first getting a greater reward. There were no rules or directions for this day in class. I just told them I’d act as an enforcer of whatever they decided to do in the 47 minutes. The girl circled in red- Emily- was a genius. She used her charisma and charm to court the majority of her peers that had less coupons, and played off their resentment of the minority that had earned more tickets for arriving to class early. In the allotted time she convinced her peers that if they voted to give her absolute power, she would confiscate the 40+ coupons held by the minority and distribute them equally. The minority of students were frustrated, but powerless against the majority vote. Emily was elected to a “supreme ruler” position, and as promised she confiscated all of the tickets from the minority of students that arrived to class first. That’s when things got interesting. She kept the vast majority of tickets for herself, and distributed a few to some of her friends. It was a microcosm of what has happened historically time and time again, and the danger our republic faces. I asked the students to write a reflection on how they now viewed unrestrained majority-rules democracy, and their opinions has definitely changed from the day prior.
2,211
8,823
1,048
42,796
5,219,667
If you follow politics, you may have heard the idea that drug companies should be more like @Costco and only charge 15% above their costs. Michigan's Democratic Senate nominee Dr. @AbdulElSayed raised the idea in his debate with @ezraklein, published in @nytimes. The analogy and other points in the discussion merit a careful response, and as you'll see in the article below, Costco is really more a model for a pharmacy (like @costplusdrugs), since it passes through other companies' inventions and doesn't have to contend with the economics of R&D. Respected economists such as @C_Garthwaite and @DanaPGoldman have written on the economics of drug development and would affirm that Costco is not a model for understanding pharma or drug prices. Aside from discussing the consequences for R&D (yes, it would discourage investment in R&D), I also show in this, with math, how imposing the Costco model on drugs would have little/no impact on affordability for patients. If someone can't afford their $5,000 deductible, then slashing the price of a $50,000 drug by even 80% (down to $10,000), would still leave them with the same unaffordable out-of-pocket cost. Mind you, with the industry's overall profits running at ~10% (compared to Costco's 3%), a modest cut to prices would make the drug industry unprofitable. Read the article to learn more if you don't believe me. So insurance is key to affordability. Insurance (PBM) can turn a $20 generic into an absurd $2,000 expense (as @mcuban has shown with his cash prices). Insurance can also make an expensive novel medicine accessible with a low copay, delivering on its promise. So when people with insurance talk about drug prices, they are almost certainly talking about what insurance is making them pay, which is a function of insurance design. While El-Sayeed and some others think we should eliminate all competition from the insurance market and replace it with a single gigantic government plan, I think a good start would be to just require that all insurance plans be honest about what they do and don't cover. Call it #truthininsurance. A plan should be free to not cover something so that everyone can decide if they want to sign up with that plan. But if a plan claims to cover a drug, the plan should then do the honest thing and cover it from the first dollar when it's appropriately prescribed (check electronically). No deductible. No copay. The patient already paid for it with a lifetime of premiums. There's no justice in charging them twice. No skin in game needed. No one fakes cancer to score chemo. No one pretends to have asthma or diabetes. Unqualified for a GLP-1? Simply deny. Novel medicines amount to only 9% of total healthcare costs and are the only part of healthcare that go generic. We needn't sacrifice their development in the name of affordability. @NPLB_org
7
7
4
46
10,101
Jeb Keiper retweeted
Reach The Beach 2026 got cancelled….  Ragnar didn’t pay its bills and NH refused the permits… but our team, Runners Drugs & Money, was ready to go.  We trained over 7000 miles since June.  We raised $128K for charity.  We were ready with plenty of booyah and cowbell.  And we did a fun run & breakfast together yesterday anyway. It just was not to be for 2026. Bummed, as it’s the best running event of the year. We’ll be ready for 2027! #RTB2026 #RunningAtlas
5
3
55
9,871
Jeb Keiper retweeted
Drug development is really easier than it looks. Anyone using AI and robotics can do it. The below startup explained that they'll have 10 clinical stage drugs within 2 years & they said they'll be able to surpass Pfizer within the next 5 years.
"Pfizer currently has the most clinical-stage drugs at 137. I will be able to reach 10 clinical-stage drugs within 2 years, then surpass Pfizer within the next 5 years." pfizer only lists 95 on its pipeline page, but still, wild claims from a "single human" pharma
3
5
1
78
15,898
If I left the impression in my last post that I was trolling @BiotechAutist for his $REPL calls, I was not. Apologies to him if it came off that way. People who make bold or contrarian predictions are going to be wrong, a lot. That's fine. No one is right all the time, or even close to it. Replimune is a really interesting case study in how the same set of facts and circumstances can be viewed differently, and shift dramatically. The highly critical FDA review set an ominous tone for the adcomm and its outcome. We all probably gave Replimune a minimal chance of success. The wild card was going to be the oncologists on the panel, particularly the melanoma experts. What would they say? How would they vote? Autiste's post during the discussion period of the adcomm caught my eye. He was watching the same panel I was watching, hearing the same comments I was hearing, yet his conclusion / prediction of a negative vote was diametrically different from mine. I was hearing the opposite. To me, the oncologists and melanoma experts sounded supportive of Replimune. Inside STAT's Slack channel where we were discussing the expert panel discussion while reporting via the live blog, I told my colleagues that Replimune was going to win the vote, mostly because of the supportive comments from Tawbi, the MD Anderson melanoma expert. I had watched enough of these adcomms to know that one, highly persuasive expert can make a big difference when it comes time to vote - moving the opinions and votes of other participants. I think that's what happened, and helps explain the 10-3 vote in favor. Would FDA follow the panel recommendation and approve? Or, dismiss and reject? A tougher call, perhaps, because many of the experts who voted yes did so reluctantly. There was still a lot of uncertainty. Again, faced with the same set of circumstances, Autiste and I disagreed. He thought FDA would reject again, for the third time. I looked at the situation differently. In STAT's slack channel, we mulled over the same question. I thought there was a 1% chance of an FDA rejection, again, mostly due to the smart, realistic perspectives offered by Tawbi and the other oncologists. They didn't completely dismiss the FDA concerns about the data. What made their arguments so persuasive was that they acknowledged the shortcomings, but still laid out a cogent rationale for why the therapy should be approved. And that was an argument the FDA could not dismiss. This is why i sincerely appreciated Autiste's posts. I wasn't saying "Haha, you were wrong, loser." I was trying to say, "We watched the same panel and reached totally different conclusions. That's interesting." Next time, Autiste will be right and I'll be wrong. That's how it goes.
24
3
1
113
21,490
Jeb Keiper retweeted
Prediction: Bio is about to become an even more popular college major. Domains where answers can be formally verified are going to fall like ninepins. In the case of bio, frontier models do ok at protein structure, molecular interactions and some genomic predictions but still struggle with context dependent behavior at the cell and organism level. That will be the next ultimate challenge.
An internal version of Astra, @OpenAI’s next major model family, solved 10 major open problems in mathematics, quantum complexity, and theoretical computer science. We believe it will be a major step for scientific reasoning. openai.com/index/ten-advance…
45
51
15
455
62,068
Jeb Keiper retweeted
Think I am likely the last person to have asked Pascal Soriot about M&A. So here it was from June 5th.
8
7
1
111
26,643
Jeb Keiper retweeted
Then I asked for a simplified version of the above : Here it is in plain English. Denver hired UnitedHealthcare to run its employee health plan. Denver pays the actual medical and drug bills itself — United just processes them. That’s what “self-funded” means. The problem is that Denver can’t see what it’s actually paying for drugs. 1. United buys the drug for one price and charges Denver a different price. It keeps the difference. Say the pharmacy gets paid $40 for a prescription. United bills Denver $100. United keeps $60. Denver never sees the $40. The contract says this out loud in three different places — it’s not hidden, it’s just written in language nobody reads. There’s no cap on how big that gap can be. 2. Drug companies pay rebates. United keeps all of them and hands Denver a flat number instead. United collects rebate checks from drug manufacturers. Instead of passing those through, it promises Denver a fixed amount per brand prescription (about $740 in 2023). If the actual rebate was $1,500, United keeps the extra $760. The contract literally says any rebates above the fixed amount belong to United. Denver has no right to know what the real number was. 3. United decides which drugs are “specialty” — and specialty drugs are where the money is. The contract defines a specialty drug as, essentially, “whatever United’s own specialty pharmacy sells.” United also reserves the right to reclassify drugs whenever it wants. Once a drug is labeled specialty and filled at United’s own pharmacy, it drops out of the normal price guarantees entirely. So the most expensive drugs are the least protected. 4. The most expensive drugs of all — the ones given in a doctor’s office or infusion center — have no price guarantee at all. The contract flatly excludes them. Cancer drugs, infusions, injections administered by a provider. Zero pricing protection. 5. Denver can’t shop around, and it can’t leave without a penalty. Denver isn’t allowed to negotiate directly with any drug manufacturer. It must use United’s mail-order pharmacy exclusively. And if Denver hires an outside vendor that steers employees to cheaper drugs or cheaper pharmacies, United can cancel all the pricing guarantees. If Denver ends the drug program early, United keeps every rebate it owes. 6. Denver can’t audit its way out of this. Denver is allowed one audit a year, capped at 300 prescriptions, using a random sample United has to approve. No auditors paid on commission. No computer-based searches for errors. You cannot find a pricing problem across hundreds of thousands of claims by randomly checking 300 of them. The audit rules exist to make sure nothing gets found. Is any of it illegal? Almost none of it. It’s a legal contract that Denver signed. The one thing that might cross a line: federal law since 2021 bans “gag clauses” — contract terms that stop an employer from seeing its own cost and claims data. This contract says United may let Denver see its pricing information, at United’s discretion. Federal regulators have said that “only if the vendor allows it” language is exactly what the gag-clause ban prohibits. And Denver has to certify to the government every year that it has no gag clauses in its contracts. The one thing Denver could actually do about it: Colorado banned this drug markup practice, effective January 2025, and self-funded employers like Denver can opt in. It’s an election, not a lawsuit. Somebody should check whether Denver ever filed it. The bottom line for an HR person: the drug program looks free. There’s no fee for it anywhere in the contract. That’s the tell. United isn’t working for free — it’s getting paid out of the drug prices, and the contract is built so Denver can’t measure how much.
70
603
37
1,645
196,560
Trump getting involved with the World Cup (not saying that was right) may actually catalyze further popularity of the sport in the USA.
2
16
692
Jeb Keiper retweeted
Crazy take from Claude
542
8,270
729
57,915
2,614,356
Jeb Keiper retweeted
The reason anyone gets insanely rich is almost always because of the stock market. It certainly how @elonmusk did. And the reason they get rich from the stock market, is because 150m Americans decided they wanted to own shares of stocks directly, or through their retirement plans, or through other approaches as a way of building their net worth and trying to create a better life for themselves. One Hundred Fifty Million Americans. About 60% of adults. Effectively believing that @elonmusk and many billionaires could make them wealthier and help them achieve a better life. If you want @elonmusk , and most billionaires to no longer be that rich, convince those 150m to sell their stocks, funds, ETFs whatever. Of course you would wipe out the net-worth of most of those people, and everyone else’s savings, as the markets crashed and brought down the economy and created the worst depression we have ever seen. Alternatively There are ways to improve healthcare access and eventually make it available to all. To start - If you want @elonmusk and all billionaires to improve healthcare for everyone , ask them to stop doing business with the enormous healthcare conglomerates and to work directly with transparently priced care providers. It’s the behemoth HC conglomerates that make HC so bad for so many. (Check my timeline for more detail) Removing them would push the cost of healthcare down for everyone. Their corporate decisions impact our healthcare cost and availability. Of course if they do that, not only would our HC costs go down , and the quality of care for their employees and the entire country go up But They would see their corporate cash flow increase dramatically and we would have more millionaires, billionaires and maybe even another trillionaire when that cash flow moved from the big health care conglomerates to their bottom line, so would the net worth of the 150 million American adults that own public stocks Capitalism is better than socialism because 150m Americans can influence exactly what happens in this country.
Capitalism is better than socialism because one man gets to be a trillionaire instead of everyone having healthcare
2,390
2,956
590
29,220
5,313,582
💯
Patient-first, America-first: The Case For Global Collaboration. While the rise of Chinese biopharma in the past decade has been meteoric, I’m firmly in the camp that their engagement in the global ecosystem is good for the sector – its more opportunity than threat, great for patients, and is a healthy forcing function to raise the game for everyone New blog link 👇
2
7
3,031
You should totally buy CNBC and up their game.
Replying to @bradloncar
Also, First on CNBC?
1
3
4,287
Not an earthquake Massachusetts just now. Meteor ☄️
Reports of an explosion hears around Boston I believe are going to be a rather significant bolide/meteor entering the atmosphere. Very large "flash" detected by GOES-19 GLM that does not correlate with active thunderstorms. #MAwx
2
10
5,418
Cure Alzheimer's Disease by 2040.
12
9
3
46
16,608
mRNA therapeutics are a powerful modality. It's also one where you can’t take shortcuts if you want to succeed, and circular RNA (circRNA) is no different. In a new interview with @PharmaScrip’s @awmcconaghie, our co-founder, President, and Head of R&D @tasuku_kitada breaks down what it takes to build an in vivo CAR-T platform that can deliver in the clinic: optimized circRNA architecture, targeted lipid nanoparticle (LNP) delivery, and programmable safety controls built directly into the construct. With major pharma bets pouring into the space, Tasuku makes the case that the companies that win will be the ones that did the engineering work before rushing to the clinic. Read more: insights.citeline.com/scrip/…
4
5
825
Jeb Keiper retweeted
INSTEAD OF WATCHING NETFLIX TONIGHT. Spend 1 hour with this. Claude AI FULL COURSE that teaches you how to BUILD and AUTOMATE anything. The people who watch this tonight will wake up tomorrow with a new skill. Watch it and bookmark it now.
15
74
1
503
68,510