Invest. Engage. Save.

Rss
Posted by: BIO Ventures for Global Health on 9/22/2009 | 0 Comments
I’m more than enthusiastic about this moment at BVGH. Thanks to hard groundbreaking work by others over the last four and a half years, the biotech industry is now poised for significant involvement in neglected diseases of the developing world. Getting to this point was no mean feat for BVGH. The good intentions and will were there–many biotech CEOs come from academia, non-profits, and other organizations where they witnessed first-hand the health burden borne by the poorest among us. But there were (and still are) barriers between that goodwill and committing a technology-rich but often cash-strapped company to the quest for a new drug for populations that simply cannot afford them.
Categories: News
Posted by: BIO Ventures for Global Health on 9/15/2009 | 0 Comments
I am very pleased to let you know that Carl Feldbaum has been elected chairman of the BVGH Board of Directors. Carl has served on BVGH’s Board since its inception in 2004. Carl is well loved and respected around the world for his ardent belief that biotechnology can improve the lives of those suffering from diseases, and especially those suffering from diseases that primarily affect the poor. BVGH was spun out of BIO during Carl’s tenure as President based on this vision.
Posted by: BIO Ventures for Global Health on 9/9/2009 | 0 Comments
In last night’s speech on health care reform, President Obama outlined his plan to make affordable health care available to all U.S. citizens, an important and worthy undertaking. Important organizations and individuals are working to ensure that the efforts to restrain and cut costs do not come at the expense of our scientific leadership, which has made the U.S. the leading innovator in developing new drugs, vaccines, and diagnostics that improve health and save lives. But perhaps less well known is the critical benefit this innovation has not just on U.S. citizens, but on people around the globe.
Page:

  
  

Recent Comments

by php flash chat on Speed Dating to Save Lives
"It was my first visit to your blog, but I admire time and effort you put into it! I have enjoyed reading many of your articles, looks like you are a professional writer! Well done! James, " Read more »

by simon on The Most Important Hire in Global Health
"I'd like to comment on the fact that the term "cost-effective" vaccines is not meaningful, since cost-effectiveness always depends on the Willigness to Pay of a given coutnry (which WHO recommends to be 1-3xGDP per capita). E.g. while in UK a medicines/vaccine that has incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of 43,000-130,000 USD/QALY will be considered "cost-effective", it will not be the case in India where the threshold is 1-3xGDP=1,000-3,000 USD/QALY. It means that the same vaccine would need to be 43x cheaper in India than in UK to be cost-effective. I believe that the future of developing countries will depend on their ability to develop vaccines locally and sell them at local prices. I am currently involved in a research project in India which aims at understanding the challenges of entrepreneurship and its role in affordable healthcare in the future. Best regards " Read more »

by Mark H on Trademark of Innovation
"Often the pharmaceutical companies are seen as evil because they do not do enough to help the poor by giving away medicines or licence rights. But we must consider two things: 1 they are commecial companies and have legal obligations towards their shareholders i.e. their prime concern is making money 2 these companies invest a vastly greater amount of money in R&D than the government. As a result their R&D occasionally finds cures inadvertently for other diseases - even if they are not actively trying to create the right medicine. So how do you create an incentive for the most effective creator of new innovative cures whose primary goal is to make money (like all companies)? Well the answer seems obvious - reward them with tax benefits that would help push them above their competitors. Whilst you could argue that this would prevent the government from reaping the benefits (tax) you could also say that the competition created would drive innovation and spending in the private sector which would improve the economy. A win win win situation - pharmaceuticals, government, developing countries!" Read more »

  

Tag Cloud