Voices of Inclusive Research
Voices of Inclusive Research is a podcast dedicated to exploring the diverse and dynamic world of inclusive research. Each episode features thought leaders, community members and advocates who we welcome to share their questions, concerns, insights, lived experiences and groundbreaking work. Our mission is to give the community a voice in clinical research. We aim to inspire and inform by highlighting the importance of diversity and inclusivity in clinical research.
Voices of Inclusive Research
Why AB 1776 Could Change the Future of Clinical Research with Sam Chung
Use Left/Right to seek, Home/End to jump to start or end. Hold shift to jump forward or backward.
In this episode of Voices of Inclusive Research, Dr. Ren sits down with Sam Chung, Senior Vice President of Government Relations and External Affairs at California Life Sciences, to discuss California's proposed AB 1776 legislation and why many in the life sciences community believe it could significantly impact clinical research and patient access.
Sam explains how the bill could unintentionally create legal barriers that discourage partnerships, slow innovation, reduce investment in biotechnology, and make it more difficult to conduct clinical trials. Together, they explore how these changes could disproportionately affect underserved communities that often rely on clinical research as a pathway to treatment.
The conversation also highlights the importance of educating policymakers and communities alike, emphasizing that protecting innovation ultimately means protecting patients.
🎧 Tune in for an important conversation about health policy, research, and why patient voices must remain at the center of every decision.
Must-Hear Insights and Key Moments
- Understanding AB 1776 - Learn why this proposed legislation has raised concerns across California's life sciences community.
- Innovation Starts with Patients - Discover how policies affecting research can directly influence patient access to new treatments.
- Why Clinical Trials Matter - Explore how slowing research could delay lifesaving therapies and reduce opportunities for diverse participation.
- Education Drives Better Policy - Hear why engaging lawmakers, organizations, and communities is essential for informed decision making.
- Protecting the Future of Research - Understand why collaboration between researchers, industry, advocates, and communities is critical for continued medical innovation.
Follow Dr. Ren:
We Want to Hear Your Voice!
Your insights on how inclusive research impacts your life and community are invaluable. Share your experiences and thoughts on how we can bridge the gap between research and real-world needs. Your stories drive our mission and inspire the future of inclusive research!
Note: We use AI transcription so there may be some inaccuracies
Dr. Ren: Welcome to another episode of Voices of Inclusive Research podcast. I'm your host, Dr. Ren, founder of Diverse Research Now, and today you will hear the voice of Sam Chang. Sam is a seasoned organizational leader with two decades of experience in statewide strategy, advocacy, and communication.
As senior vice president of Government Relations and External Affairs at California Life Sciences, a California leading life sciences trade association, Sam works at the forefront of biotechnology and health innovation policy, connecting industry, government, and community to drive meaningful progress across California.
And so we're so excited to have Sam on VIR today to discuss a very important bill. It's the AB 1776 bill that sits at such an important crossroads between healthcare access, clinical innovation, and real-world experiences of patients and communities. So I'm really excited to have Sam on today, so let's get started.
How are you doing today, Sam?
Sam Chung: I am doing great. Such a privilege and, and honor to be on your podcast- ... to talk about such an important issue. Thank you. Thank you. We've, at the life sciences community, have really been, focused on AB 1776, educating our lawmakers throughout the state. Mm-hmm. And so it's a big passion of ours right now.
Okay. And so we see it as a big, big threat, and so we're happy to discuss it with you on this podcast.
Dr. Ren: Yes, I am so happy to have you discussing it as well because the word you just said was threat. Mm-hmm. I'm concerned about that, and I'm sure the community is, too. So tell us about this bill and why it's such a threat to life sciences.
Sam Chung: Yes. Thank you. Uh, so- Mm-hmm ... AB 1776 right now is moving through the state legislature. It has, gone through the first house, the estate assembly, and now it currently sits in the second house, the state senate. Mm-hmm. it is about to get its first policy committee hearing in the Senate Judiciary Committee next Tuesday.
If it does pass out of the Senate Judiciary Committee, it'll go to the Senate Appropriations Committee, which is the fiscal committee that evaluates the cost impact to the state, and if it- Mm-hmm ... passes out of there, it goes before the whole Senate floor for all the state Senate- Okay ... to be able to vote on it before- Okay
the final stop, which is the governor's desk. Okay. And so the reason why we're so concerned about this bill is because it is, I think, one of the top existential threats to the life sciences ecosystem in California. Hmm. And ultimately, when something impacts the life sciences ecosystem, it ultimately impacts patients.
All the innovation that we do in our ecosystem, we do it for patients. All the innovation in the world means nothing- If patients don't have access to medicines that can cure them. And so that- Yeah ... is why our scientists and researchers wake up every day looking through that microscope, looking for a, a decades Yeah
of investment, hard work to try to get to a new medicine that will help patients, not just here in California, but around the world. And so what- Yeah ... this bill would do is it creates a legal threat. Basically- Okay ... what it's doing is saying that any company of any size can be sued by any third party, any citizen, the attorney general, anyone, if they perceive anti-competitive behavior.
Now, the reason why this is such a concern is no one knows what is considered competitive and what is considered anti-competitive- Right ... under this bill. So we are all guessing as to what we're gonna be sued about. W- And competitors can sue you, anyone can sue you. So- Wow ... that is a big concern for us.
Currently, under federal law, and this has to do with antitrust, which is something that nobody, no regular person thinks about. Um. But antitrust laws on the federal level, puts forth federal case law. All these cases have been adjudicated in federal law over the last century. So that case law will tell us what is competitive and what is anti-competitive.
Mm-hmm. But what this bill does is says, " You have to erase all that federal case law, all that federal precedent, and we're gonna start fresh and new in California." And I think what they're trying to get after, what the author of the bill is trying to get after are some of the, more dominant players, maybe in the tech sector, that they wanna go after.
Which is fine.
Dr. Ren: Mm.
Sam Chung: That, ... There's nothing wrong with that. Mm. But when you design a bill that- Impacts every industry in California, including biotech. Yeah. That's where we have huge concerns, and we, I think we believe, and we're biased, but we believe that this disproportionately impacts the biotech industry in California.
It's such a delicate ecosystem that's- Okay ... very collaborative. It relies, small companies rely on the big companies. Big companies rely on the small companies. We rely on venture capital. We rely on academia. There's partnerships throughout. Yes. And it's a beautiful ecosystem, but with these legal threats, it makes that symbiotic relationship potentially, compromised.
And so we wanna make sure- Wow ... that we need to protect this ecosystem. We don't want- Yeah ... legal threats to be the reason why we can't get medicines to the patients who are looking for hope. And so- Yeah ... we think that this bill, yeah, will definitely dry up venture capital funding. It'll dry up these partnerships.
Clinical trials will be impacted, and it really prevents our ability to get medicines to communities, especially low income communities that rely on some of these clinical trials to get treatments. and- Yeah ... that's what we're really afraid of, is the unintended consequences that will undermine the very foundations of how this amazing and dynamic ecosystem works.
Dr. Ren: Yeah, I mean you're gonna have to, like, tiptoe. if it gets passed, I feel like doctors, researchers are gonna be, like, kind of scared to do what they need to do to get these treatment options going. You know what I mean? Like,
clinical trials are used as a treatment option, you know? Yes. This bill is going to not allow that, or it's gonna make it very hard.
Sam Chung: It is gonna make it very hard, and I can go through some examples 'cause, um- Okay ... especially when it comes to antitrust, it's so abstract- O-
in most people's minds. Okay, yeah. And so maybe we can, provide some examples. It- And so, a lot of our companies, provide patient assistance programs. So if somebody is under-insured or non-insured, our companies will provide co-pay assistance, so we'll pay for your co-pays. Now, what this bill would allow is potentially that to be made illegal if somebody sues.
if a competitor sues a company that offers a patient assistance program saying, "Hey, that is creating an unfair situation- Oh, wow, okay ... because now patients are gonna choose to sue that company rather than my company 'cause they want the patient assistance." Ah. And so that, it could potentially dismantle patient assistance programs.
don't, we don't think anybody wants that. We, our companies partner with clinics, especially low-income neighborhoods- Right ... where our companies will provide steeply discounted or free diagnostics for HIV, hep B, hep C. We provide these things to clinics so that- Mm-hmm ... people can have access to it. We-
Dr. Ren: Mm-hmm
Sam Chung: multi-year contracts with these clinics, but that could potentially go away if a competitor says, " Hey, I also create diagnostics in those same areas.
I can't compete with free or steeply discounted." And they can sue under this bill saying that is, pa- or what, a price setting. That's price setting so- Wow ... we can't, that is illegal. And so they can sue under that. So the impact to patients is tremendous, especially those in the minority camp, in low income neighborhoods that depend on community health clinics.
That is who you're ultimately hurting. I don't think that's the intent. the author of this bill, to be fair, is, a great person. We have a great relationship with her. But because of the way this bill is written, we think it'll hurt the very people she's trying to help, and that's the unfortunate part of this.
And when we talk about clinical trials, so many clinical trials require exclusive partnership with hospitals and clinics, and so a competitor can say, " Hey, now we don't have access to those same patients, because we're doing clinical trials in the same space," and they can sue.
And so if those clinical trials aren't able to happen, then ultimately those patients who really rely on it or want hope from a medicine that could potentially come to market, those are the ones who are gonna be impacted. And so from a health equity perspective, from a patient access perspective-
Dr. Ren: Mm-hmm
Sam Chung: we're very, very concerned that all this- Yeah ... progress we've made in the state of California can be completely reversed with a bill like AB 1776.
Dr. Ren: Wow. Wow. I'm like, Oh, my goodness. Okay, so it's super important for this bill not to get passed, because I feel like it just sound like it's gonna be a zoo.
Like, things are just gonna be, up and down all over the place, just adding to the craziness already happening. I don't know. I mean, there's already existing barriers, right? Mm-hmm. Like, we already have enough barriers. This sounds like this is going to add even more barriers to treatment options and to the people that really need it, those underrepresented communities.
Sam Chung: Yes, especially in a state like California, this is- Okay ... especially impactful, in a negative way because California's life sciences biotech ecosystem is one of the most productive in the world. We have an amazing academia talent infrastructure. Some of the s- best scientists and researchers- Yes
work here. Yeah. We have centers of excellence throughout the state, which we're so proud of. so that makes us big players when it comes to especially rare diseases. there's- Right ... a third of all rare disease treatments around the world, a third of them were all came out of California. And so, it's hard to incentivize research in this space because the prospect of getting your investment back is very, very low 'cause the patient population is so small. But California plays an outsize role in saying, "Hey, even if this impacts maybe just a couple hundred patients, we will put in the effort and work to get a medicine or a cure to address that rare disease."
And so that's where we see the impacts being pretty profound, in California, and we don't wanna send the wrong message in California. This is an ecosystem that, produces some of the most innovative medicines. Some of the health needs around the world that nobody has been able to crack the code on, California continues to lead the way in advancing new breakthroughs all the time.
And so with a bill like this, you slow down innovation. Yeah, that's the thing. You slow down the ability to get medicines to patients, and that's really, really tough because medicine is inherently so hard to create. Yeah. Me- especially med- that kind of It takes
Dr. Ren: so long. It takes so long, right?
Sam Chung: Yeah. Well, it takes
Dr. Ren: years.
I mean, clinical trials take forever. Like, I mean, you can be in a clinical trial for 10, 15 years
Sam Chung: Yes. Yes, that's on average. Yes. and some people say, and I think, it's true, it's harder to make a new medicine than to get a man on the moon. And so our work is harder than rocket science.
it's already a very difficult industry because the success rate is so low. we have a 92% failure rate. So all those medicines that go through clinical trials- 92% of them fail. And so it requires a lot of work. And when you have something like AB 1776 layered on top of it, that has ripple effects through the entire ecosystem because our startup companies, and by the way, 90% of our ecosystem are startup companies, meaning 10 employees or less.
an ecosystem of startups.
Dr. Ren: The rest are big companies.
Sam Chung: 90%. Everyone thinks about big pharma and they go, "Oh, all these massive companies." There's only 35 big companies. The rest are small three to four scientists- coming together to form an LLC, and they rely on venture capital to come in and say, "Hey, we see something promising in your research.
We will give you money for the next 10 years to work on this."
Dr. Ren: Okay.
Sam Chung: And so What is gonna happen to that funding if a bill were, like this were to pass? Because w- we have to think about it in terms of if a medicine or a treatment is successful, it immediately is a dominant player in the market because
Dr. Ren: the- Mm-hmm
Sam Chung: the areas in which you specialize in are so small. It, it's often the only treatment for that particular disease. Mm-hmm. And so if you're the only game in town, of course you're gonna be considered dominant. Right. But under this vehicle, it makes it so much easier for other people to sue any successful treatment that comes out of a research facility.
Yeah. "Oh, now you're a dominant player. Now you have a monopoly on the market." But it's like, we should be celebrating new medicine-
Dr. Ren: Exactly ...
Sam Chung: instead of being sued. And so no venture capital is gonna want to fund that if they're like, "Hey, even if we're successful, we're still gonna get sued. Why would we pursue that?"
And so that's what's so unfortunate about this. The impacts are so broad, and that's why we're raising the red flags.
Dr. Ren: and even with the timelines, I mean, so we just said that clinical trials take about 10 to 15 years. it could possibly take even longer, like- Yeah
if you have to deal with this bill now. Like-
Sam Chung: Yeah, it could take longer,
Dr. Ren: it could take longer to happen ... it's gonna take longer to get to the people.
Sam Chung: Yes. Yes, and we want to shorten the timeline. Exactly. The game is shortening the timeline, especially as we have competitors, growing competitors, not just domestically but abroad as well.
China is right on our heels, and for them, their clinical trials, they do it in less than five years. And so compared to us, that is such a short amount of time, and so which means the cost of developing medicines there is also cheaper. And so- Mm-hmm ... but we here in the United States, we want to continue to lead when it comes to biomedical innovation and biomedical research.
And so we want to make sure we don't have a regulatory landscape that makes it so difficult that we can't compete with our competitors, which means patients, our patients, we want them to have the access to medicines that are developed here ' cause then we're right here, we're doing the clinical trials here.
The patients are here, so the medicines will get to them right away. If the clinical trials is happening in China, our patients in California aren't getting access to those clinical trials. And so- Yeah ... it's important that we have it being done here in California, the most diverse state in the nation, the most diverse patient population- It is
in the nation. And we are- Yeah ... our companies are pushing every day to make our clinical trials more diverse. The FDA is requiring more and more diverse clinical trials- That's right ... which is great- That's right ... which is a good thing. But if it's all happening in another country, you don't have access to that same diversity, and so that's a big value of ours, obviously operating here in California.
And that's why it's so important that we let, All patient organizations, they all need to know the profound impact that this bill would have on them.
Dr. Ren: Mm-hmm. So tell me a little bit about the work that Life Sciences, you yourself, have been doing. What have you been saying to the policymakers?
How often have you been saying this to the pol- like, what impact are you, trying to have in this?
Sam Chung: Yeah. We're the name of the game is education.
Dr. Ren: Okay.
Sam Chung: Um, these lawmakers, are bombarded with every different- I'm sure ... issue area under the sun. Yeah. So they know one inch about everything.
Yeah. Now, it's our job to give them that second inch- Okay ... which helps them understand the nuances of proposed laws and policies. Okay. And so while on the face of this bill, it may seem like a good bill, like they're trying to create more competition, which is a good thing. We support that as well, but it, the devil's in the details in how you craft it, how you write it.
Mm. And the way that it's written, unfortunately, has so many unintended consequences for our industry that we're doing a lot of education. So we've met with almost every legislator, sitting down with them just the way you and I are talking- Yeah ... educating them on the impacts. Good. And so the tough part is, like, making our voice cut through all the noise, 'cause you have a billion other sectors who are also raising red flags.
Right. And so, but we, believe we have the best story to tell on this-
Dr. Ren: Yeah ...
Sam Chung: as far as unintended consequences. And so we've been meeting- Yeah ... with everybody, sharing, and we have luckily,legislative allies who are, helping educate their colleagues as well. but we make policy in the world of politics, and it's really hard to stop bills because lawmakers don't wanna vote against their colleagues' bills.
And so that is-
Dr. Ren: Yeah ...
Sam Chung: sort of the pressure cooker that we're operating under. Okay. But we're very, very hopeful that legislators will do the right thing. Okay. Will do the right thing for patients to create good policy for California.
Dr. Ren: Yeah. And I know Diverse Research now, we have definitely written a letter, opposing this bill and, kind of explaining why it impacts the work that we do.
So, like- can other companies do that as well? Like, I know maybe we can put that information, in the show notes so people can know how they can, like, write letters and, you know, other companies. You know, the more the merrier, right? The more the- Right ... we need as many people sounding the alarm as possible, right?
Sam Chung: 100%. so that's the perfect segue. Thanks for setting that up. Yes. I can, send you a link where both individuals and companies can sign a petition. Okay. And that petition will get populated, and it'll go to all the committee members before they vote on it. And so that's very important, so that they see the breadth and the scope of those who are weighing in.
It can't just be companies that are weighing in. We want patient organizations, we want clinics, we want hospitals, safety net hospitals in particular. We need all hands on deck- Okay ... showing, hey, Yep ... the downsides of this bill so outweigh the positives, we can't have this bill get signed into law. And so that- Yeah
so we can make it very, very easy through this portal, this link, where you would just need to input your name and organization or where you live, and th- that'll help populate and automatically send to the right legislators.
Dr. Ren: Yeah. I love that what you, one of the key words you said, and what we love at Diverse Research Now, is education.
Mm-hmm. Because I think education is huge, right? Like, we, not just the policymakers have to be educated, the community needs to be educated. They need to know what's going on. SoThank you again for coming on here and, like, really sharing with us about this, because knows? this is not a common theme that you see on the, like, 6:00 news or on social media.
Like, it's not something that everyone is, paying attention to. So-
Sam Chung: Correct ...
Dr. Ren: yeah.
Sam Chung: Especially on an issue called antitrust. Nobody wants to get a deep dive into antitrust. So yeah, bills like this get overseen, and then the consequences if it gets signed into law, we're like, " how did this happen?
that's why, yeah, so that's why you having me on this podcast, we're so grateful, 'cause it just gets the word out, and we want the public to be educated. cause we believe the data and all that is on our side, and so we wanna definitely get our voice out there.
Dr. Ren: Yeah, I mean, and as we're educating the community about clinical trials, I sometimes have this, dilemma in my head going because I'm out here educating people about clinical trials, trying to get them involved in it, but then when they get in there and they're ready to go, there could be things like this in place that stops it or that's another barrier.
And then, they get discouraged about getting involved, you know what I mean? So it's yeah, that's a battle we battle every day.
Sam Chung: and we can't give- ... working in the community ... yes, and all the progress that's been made by so many people on the barriers front. We've been trying to address barriers for a long time in this state.
Well, we can't reverse it with a bill that has so many unintended consequences. And so we're with you. we wanna, I think this is gonna be the broadest sort of coalition that's being put together between us, patient organizations, all the diversity groups to say, "Hey, like, this is not okay." and the legislature should really take its time to get the policy right.
I think the intention is in the right place, but unfortunately what's currently in the black and white written language of this bill, it is just an unacceptable policy for a place like California to pass. Yeah. Like, that takes us in the wrong direction.
Dr. Ren: Exactly. Now tell me how urgent is this?
Like, how quickly do we need to get acting on this? Because in the beginning you mentioned, the process and where this bill is, and, I never know, like- The process and the timing of it all. when do you expect to really have us, know what's gonna happen with this bill?
Sam Chung: Yeah. So, we have, the policy committee that's coming up next Tuesday. Mm-hmm. And so we definitely want as many signatories, signed on before then. But this bill has to basically be, if it is gonna keep passing, it has to get to the governor by the end of August. And so- Okay ... the timeline is between now and the end of August to affect the outcome on this bill.
Okay. And so we hope that we stop this bill before it gets to, August 30th. there's gonna be, in the middle of August, a key appropriations committee hearing that is going to determine the fate of many, many bills, including this one. Okay. So middle of August is really the target date. We want every, all the opposition to be registered before, middle of August.
Dr. Ren: Okay. Now tell me, what has to happen to stop this bill? What exactly has to happen?
Sam Chung: So enough senators need to vote no. So- Right ... w- on this hearing on June 30th, there's 13 members of the Senate Judiciary Committee, so we need at least seven to vote no. And if we- Okay ... can get seven to vote no, then it goes to the Senate Appropriations, and we need a majority of the Senate Appropriations Committee to vote no.
And so- Oh, okay ... um, that's the name of the game is trying to get as many legislators on the Senate to see the downsides of this bill so they say, "You know what? It's just not ready. We're gonna vote no on this to- Okay ... table it for this year."
Dr. Ren: Okay. and now, is those the senators' names that we need to know to, like, write letters to?
Those are the senators w- who we need to know, right?
Sam Chung: Yeah. Yeah. I'll provide you the link, and when- Okay ... you guys sign that, it'll, automatically go to the right senators. Okay. Okay. And so we've made it so that it's very, very easy. It's very user-friendly- Good ... so that you don't need to do a bunch of research to figure out where it needs to go.
Good. So we have it all pre-populated.
Dr. Ren: Okay. Awesome, awesome. Okay. Well, it sounds like we got some work to do, Sam.
Sam Chung: Yes, yes. We got some work- Thank you for partnering with us.
Dr. Ren: Of course. yeah, no, I mean, it impacts my work here at Diverse Research now. It impacts so many, the good work that we're trying to do to bring diversity to clinical trials.
We don't want any more barriers. it just sounds like it's a step backwards- Mm-hmm ... for us. And like you said, we are doing so much good work, and we have made some improvements. And we are- Mm-hmm ... getting out here in the community, and more and more community members are learning about research, getting involved.
Sam Chung: we're really out here normalizing, this, clinical trials in the community, and more community members are so interested. And I just would hate that to add- More barriers. 'Cause, we haven't gotten through all of them, but I would just hate to add more. And so we have to definitely get this stopped, Yes. I love it. Yeah, thank you. it hurts our feelings when all of this progress around barriers, like, is potentially threatened. And so, we owe it to our scientists and researchers and the patients who are, in this, and, you know, we're coming alongside them. And so we wanna do our best to stop regulatory policies from affecting their healthcare and their families.
And that's, and that's
Dr. Ren: what it should be about, right, Sam? It should be about the patients.
Sam Chung: Yes, that's what it all boils down to. We are all here for the patient.
Dr. Ren: we all have to look through the lens of what is in the best interest of the patient. Mm-hmm. And if it's not in the best interest of the patient, it's not good enough.
Sam Chung: Like, why are we all here trying to craft good policy if we're gonna hurt patients? And so that's what this bill does, and that's the thing that every legislator needs to hear, is the patient voice is getting ignored in this situation. Yeah. We need to move the barriers that help them get the help that they need.
Dr. Ren: Okay. Well, it sounds like we might need a part two on this because you know- Yeah, this is involved ... by the end, by, the middle of August, like, I really want the community to know. I don't wanna just share this information and then not come back and tell them what actually happened and if we were successful in our efforts.
I would love to have you back on after we know what's gonna happen, after we... all the work, and see what happens. So hopefully, we, be successful.
Sam Chung: I would love to be back on. Yeah. So thank you for that invite.
Dr. Ren: Of course. Okay, Sam. Well, thank you so much. Anything else you wanna, like, leave with the community or leave with pharma or the policymakers?
Anyone, the comm- the audience that is listening in today?
Sam Chung: Yeah, I think, one of the thingsI feel like I've been very negative because of this, we're talking about this threat. But, I just wanna leave by saying, we should all be proud of California and the amazing work that comes out of this state.
Yeah ... the values combined with the entrepreneurial spirit with- Yeah ... some of the best talent in the world, this is a great place to be. And, uh- Yes ... where we lead in innovation, the rest of the world benefits. And so, I don't wanna be too down. Yeah. We will be successful. Yeah. And so, we wanna continue to uplift everyone along the way, and, we'll be in this ride together.
Dr. Ren: I second that. Everything you said, I second that. California is great. I'm from Chicago, but California's my second home. Mm-hmm. It really has become my second home. and I really don't think I wanna go anywhere else, so
Sam Chung: Yeah, stay here. Stay here. Be with us. It's a great place.
Dr. Ren: I'm gonna be with you and continue to fight to make us better, so
Sam Chung: There you go.
I love it. I love it.
Dr. Ren: All right. Well, thank you so much, Sam. You take care, and we'll see you co- we'll be back.
Sam Chung: Yes. Sounds great. Okay. Thank you.
Dr. Ren: All
Sam Chung: right.
Dr. Ren: Let's do it
together. Bye. Okay. Bye bye.
