IMBTUKImmune Macro-Biotic Technology

Home / At a glance

Fact sheet

IMBT at a glance.

A short, dated reference for partners, journalists, researchers and anyone else who wants an accurate summary of what Immune Macro-Biotic Technology UK Ltd does, what it has shown, and what it has not. Last reviewed 21 October 2026.

Who we are

Immune Macro-Biotic Technology UK Ltd (IMBT) is a biotechnology company in Torquay, Devon, United Kingdom. It was founded in 1999 by Christopher Jeremy Leonard, who is Founder and CEO. Associate Professor Tristan Cogan is Chief Scientific Officer. Contact: cjleonard@imbt.org.

Other organisations use the letters “IMBT”. This page is about the company behind imbt.org only.

What IMBT does

IMBT researches how the evolutionarily conserved innate immune defences of insects can be used to help control harmful bacteria and support immune responses in animals, starting with chickens. The method is patented.

In the method, fly larvae are exposed to a carefully chosen bacterium, preferably Pseudomonas syringae. The larvae respond by making more antimicrobial peptides, and the resulting material is studied as an animal feed ingredient. How the method works.

What has been demonstrated

Each finding below is shown with the system it was measured in and its limits. The full evidence, with the study design, is on the Evidence page.

Finding
System
Limit
Demonstrated

Bacterial exposure raised larval antimicrobial peptide expression up to thirty-fold.

Fly larvae, 4-day-old, 12 h exposure to P. syringae
Larval gene expression, not a health outcome.
Demonstrated

Live or dead bacteria can be used, with no effect on larval feed consumption or final weight.

Fly larvae
Manufacturing observation.
Demonstrated

Different bacterial doses favour different peptides (diptericin at high doses, sapecin at low).

Fly larvae
Direction of effect reported; full dose-response data on request.
Demonstrated

Powder from stimulated larvae (1% w/v) killed C. jejuni over three hours; unstimulated powder did not (P=0.0015).

In vitro, laboratory culture
Not an animal or clinical result.
Demonstrated

Fewer birds colonised with Campylobacter after feeding stimulated larvae (41% free vs 13% soya control).

Broiler chicks, oral challenge model, day 8
Single study, single pathogen strain, short duration.
Demonstrated

Higher Gallinacin 11 expression in the chick caecal tonsil on stimulated larvae than on unstimulated larvae (P=0.0007).

Broiler chicks, gene expression
Expression of one gene; effect on outcomes is inferred.
Demonstrated

No significant change in lactic acid bacteria or enterobacteria.

Broiler chicks, caecal counts
Two groups measured; wider microbiome not assessed.
Demonstrated

Lower IL-10 expression in the chick gut-associated tissue on stimulated larvae than on the soya control; IL-1β and IL-6 did not differ significantly.

Broiler chicks, gene expression (same study)
One tissue, mRNA only. The patent notes it may reflect less overall immune activation; effect on outcomes is not shown.
Demonstrated

Stimulating black soldier fly larvae raised the expression of the genes controlling the Cecropin family, Attacin-A, Defensin-A and Defensin-like peptide 4 antimicrobial peptides. The stimulation did not cause larval mortality.

Black soldier fly larvae, qPCR gene expression, with the University of Bristol
Larval gene expression, not a health outcome.

Patents

  • US 10,383,899 B2, Immunity generation, granted 2019. View patent
  • US 11,779,611 B2, Immunity generation, granted 10 October 2023. View patent
  • US 12,458,670 B2, controlling a pathogen’s resistance to immune surveillance, granted 4 November 2025. View patent

IMBT also reports patent grants in Vietnam, Australia and China, and a pending application in Canada. Those are as reported by IMBT; details are shared with serious enquirers. Patent summaries here are simplified and are not legal descriptions of the claims. Intellectual property.

What this work does not show

  • It has not been tested in humans. The demonstrated results are laboratory, larval and poultry findings. IMBT makes no human-health claims.
  • It is not a treatment, prevention or cure for any disease in animals or people, and IMBT makes no such claim.
  • It does not replace antibiotics. IMBT does not make that claim. The work is investigated as a way of supporting an animal’s own defences.
  • The poultry evidence is a single study, with a single pathogen strain and a short duration.
  • Independent replication and peer-reviewed publication are still to come. The poultry results are reported in IMBT’s patent documentation.
  • No regulatory approval is claimed for any product or use.
  • Potential applications described elsewhere on this site are possibilities, not established clinical or commercial outcomes.

Common questions

Does IMBT cure disease?

No. IMBT makes no claim that its technology treats, prevents or cures any disease.

Has this been tested in humans?

No. The demonstrated results are laboratory, larval and poultry findings.

Does it replace antibiotics?

No. IMBT does not make that claim.

Has the work been peer reviewed?

The poultry results are reported in IMBT’s patent documentation. Independent replication and peer-reviewed publication are natural next steps, and IMBT welcomes research partners who can help.

Is IMBT looking for partners?

Yes. IMBT is open to research collaboration, licensing and development partners. Ways of working together, or contact us.