Dr. Martin Picard

And then the human genome was sequenced, 2001.

And then there was like,

10, 20 years of GWAS, genome-wide association studies, trying to find people who have this disease and trying to find which gene do they have that other people don't have, right?

Those large-scale studies.

And if the human genome project and the search for causal genes for common chronic diseases had been an RCT, it would have failed its primary endpoint.

I think if we're real about this, the hypothesis was wrong.

It was a useful hypothesis, like many hypotheses are.

It led us to learn a bunch.

And the human genome, the sequencing that was such a driver of progress in biomedical science.

But it's failed to solve the big mysteries about why we get sick, when we get sick.

No genes will tell you this.

Yeah, it's good.

Of course, it's good.

There's a lot of really high-quality science that's happening.

But I think in general, academic science has kind of lost track with its core purpose.

And now we have like an incentive system, and there's a lot of forces at play in administrative processes that don't serve the primary end goal.

Well, it's all getting revised now.

So could you explain the result?

So when we started to think about this, we thought, what if we found hairs that have, like the same hair has two colors.

So you have a piece of a segment of the hair that is dark and then a segment that is white.