A Tale of Two Debates
After watching the Ontario provincial leadership debate last night and the California governorship election debate tonight, I'm left wishing that our leaders here in Ontario were more like the gubernatorial candidates. What a debate! It had substance, depth, REAL questions from one debater to another, and REAL answers. There was very little evasion going on - for the most part, the debaters were giving relatively straightforward answers to questions. There was real discussion going on - real debating.
In contract, the debate last night between Hampton, McGuinty and Eves was a joke. Hampton kept repeating the same few points over and over and over again; McGuinty barely answer any questions asked of him; and Eves was more wooden than Pinnochio.
I never thought I'd say this, but I envy the democracy in California.
Public v. Private Equity
Saw this article on Slate about the potential effects of disclosure requirements on private equity funds in the US:
Take Your Money and Leave - The growing war between public pension funds and private equity firms. By Daniel GrossInteresting read; I'll wait to post my thoughts on this topic.
The future of Canada
In his first major speech since leaving cabinet, Paul Marting promised fiscal reponsibility while working to stimulate innovation and business without getting government overly involved. He cited the preponderance of pension fund money in venture capital in the US, and the lack thereof in Canada.
CNEW: Politics - Martin's economic plan touts more tax cutsI know this speech doesn't say a whole lot, but what it does say sounds very promising for the future of this country.
Prix Galien
Last night was the awards dinner for the Prix Galien Canada 2003. This is a set of awards given to researchers and pharmaceutical companies for the most important research and the most innovative product of the year. I was lucky enough to be there, thanks to an invitation from Merck Frosst, and it turned out to be a really great evening. At the Merck table there were 4 Merck employees from the office I worked at during the summer, as well as a number of guests from government, academia and industry. From government, there was the Chief of Staff for Ontario's Minister of Health; a PhD student at UofT - working under a professor who holds Merck's chair in Organic Chemistry; the Director of Research from the Toronto General Hospital; Ken Knox; a senior manager from a biotech company; and me.
I was expecting a relatively quiet evening, with a bit of chatting with the guests. I didn't expect to be grilled by the Minister's Chief of Staff, Ed Arundell. After the introductions to the event by the MC, I turned to speak with the Research Director, on my left, when I heard "So, Mr. MBA...". I looked across the table and Ed was looking at me with a grin on his face. "So," he said "tell me, how do we encourage the growth of the biotech sector in Ontario?" He had obviously been briefed on my work over the summer.
Over the next 10 minutes, we verbally sparred about the role of government, pharmaceuticals and venture capitalists in the growth of biotech in Ontario vs. San Francisco and Boston. In the end, it appeared we agreed on most everything - the crux being that we didn't feel that government could deliberately create a climate of high-risk capital such as exists in Silicon Valley. The manager from the biotech company didn't agree with us, however - he felt that through tax incentives we could encourage VCs to invest in biotech firms. Hogwash.
We already have some of the most favourable tax incentives in North America, and the labour-sponsored funds do a great job of encouraging people to invest their money. That doesn't change the fact that the biotech business model doesn't fit the standard VC investment model, and that a VC has to seek out high-risk investments on his/her own; having an additional tax incentive won't really help with that.
Of course, I think my mentioning the fact that entrepreneurs in Canada are control freaks who don't like to give up any part of their companies didn't sit well with the biotech manager. Ed seemed to agree, though.
In any case, it was a very entertaining evening.
The winner of the Prix Galien Canada for Research was Mark Wainberg, a doctor at the Jewish Memorial Hospital in Montreal and professor at McGill. He's done extensive research into HIV/AIDS and was awarded the prize for his work into anti-retroviruses. He made quite a stirring and controversial acceptance speech, essentially attacking politicians and generic drug manufacturers for failing to support the provision and distribution of drugs to third-world nations. I tend to agree with everything he said, although I felt that was not the appropriate arena for those remarks.
The winner of the Prix Galien Canada for Innovative Product was Glyvec by Novartis Canada - a cancer therepeutic that promises to revolutionize cancer treatments.
Congratulations to both winners, and thanks to Susan Grant and Merck Frosst for inviting me to such a memorable evening.
This is going a bit too far
I'm all for recognizing gay marriages, and I think it's about time our country came out of the 20th century and acknowledged the rights of homosexuals as equal individuals in our society. But this is going a bit too far.
A gay couple trying to enter the US filed their customs papers as a family, were denied entry on that basis. Although they were told they could refile on the spot as individuals and they'd be admitted, they felt their dignity had been affronted and came home. Now they've hired a lawyer to investigate whether they should sue the Canadian and US governments.
CNEWS Canada - Gay couple denied U.S. entryCome on people, let's keep some perspective here. This has nothing to do with denying anybody their humanity. If you're going to visit another country, you have to respect that country's laws. The US does not recognize homosexuals couples as families, so when you're going there, you're not a family. Be happy that Canada is moving ahead with individual rights, but you can't force your views and beliefs onto an entire nation if they're not willing to accept them.
The killer biotech app
FDA Approves Sale Of Prescription Placebo...from our friends at The Onion.
Frightening outlook on the future of US budgets
Citizens for Tax Justice put out a "realistic"
projection of US budget shortfalls over the next 10 years, assuming all of Bush's tax cuts are implemented and maintained as planned.
The CTJ has been known to put forth very reliable numbers in the past, so there is reason to be more than a little worried about these projections. How can American politicians continue to allow the Bushies to get away with this?
LEADER 2004
We had an info session to tell the first years about the LEADER project, and the turnout was great. I took a minute to plug the Entrepreneurial program, and after the presentation, a bunch of people came up to me to talk about it. I'm very happy to see that there's interest in the program from people who look like they'll be great additions to the team. Can't wait to see the applications and get going on this.
The grind
I've been very negligent in my blogging duties. School seems to have sucked me back in again very quickly, and I'm finding it difficult to keep up with what's going on in the news to find things to write about. Ah well.
School's been interesting so far. Second year definitely is less stressful than first year. To begin with, I've got Fridays off, so I plan on playing golf as much as I can until winter sets in. The biotech classes have been good so far - kudos to Jim Hatch and his people for doing such a great job putting this together. That guy works harder than any prof I know, and I'm gaining more and more respect for him as time goes by.
Our cell biology course is almost over. Next Thursday is the last class and our final exam is the following Monday. Very strange to have a final exam in September, but that'll be one less thing to have to think about.
Friday night...time to drink.
Lab work
Our molecular biology prof had us do a lab today. A lab! I haven't done a lab experiment in almost 10 years. It was kind of fun being in the lab again, but I was reminded of why I decided not to go back to chemistry after a year in computers.
We ran a few experiments that were designed to familiarize us with the world of DNA and protein analysis. Ran a PCR, did a gel electrophoresis, and a bacterial culture. Pretty cool stuff.
Today was also the day of Pepe's memorial. I thought it was really nicely done - a couple of his close friends spoke, and a tree was planted in his memory, which was a very nice gesture on Ivey's part.
Yay!
As I've written before, I'm not exactly a fan of the Bushies. The one exception out of all of his handpicked people is Colin Powell, and it looked like he was so frustrated with the show that he'd decided to retire in 2004.
On Wednesday the administration finally admitted what's been obvious for months - that they can't do this alone - and
asked for UN help in Iraq. Today's Slate has an
article that discusses some of the back-room manipulations and discussions that led to this Bush epiphany, and thankfully it seems Powell is regaining some of the stature and influence.
It's likely no coincidence that yesterday the administration also
softened its stance in talks with North Korea.
Here's hoping that this marks a turning point in American foreign policy under Bush and that Powell decides to stay on after 2004 (assuming Bush is re-elected) to continue to lend some credibility to these jokers.
Ivey Biotech
The first week is over, and the new Ivey Biotech program has been (so far) far better than I could have hoped. Professor Hatch (our finance professor from first year) has done an absolutely amazing job of putting this program together. The professors he's brought over from the faculty of medicine/life sciences have been amazing. I thought microbiology would be a really dry course, but the professor (Greg Gloor) did a great job of making it interesting and relevant to a bunch of know-nothing MBA students.
If the first week is any indication of how the program is going to go, I can't wait for the rest of the courses. We've had three different classes so far - Biotech Environment, Microbiology, and Physiology - and they have all far exceeded my expectations.
I can't wait to see how the upcoming courses go.
Drug ads would send costs soaring?
An article from CANOE summarizing a recent study done on the effects of Direct to Consumer Advertising (DTCA) in Canada and the US:
Drug ads would send costs soaring: study on C-HealthThe researchers argue that DTCA results in a higher rate of prescriptions for (expensive) medications that the prescribing doctor often does not feel is required. Seems to me that if that's the case, it's the fault of the doctor, not the pharmaceutical company. The purpose of the ads is to inform the patients of their choices. When a patient comes in and asks for a particular drug, it should still be the doctor's responsibility to further educate the patient to make a truly informed decision; the doctor should not just be "caving" and automatically prescribing the medication.
Besides, an increase in prescription medication can actually decrease the overall costs of health care. Dr. Frank Lichtenburg did a study (Benefits and Costs of Newer Drugs: An Update. National Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper No. 8996. 2002) in which he found that a $1 increase in drug expenditures leads to an average
decrease in non-drug expenditures (hospital stays, doctor visits, etc) of
$7. Seems like pretty potent medicine for our health care systems.
So before studies like this cause our federal government to renew the ban on DTCA, we need to better understand the role those drugs play in the health care system. I'm not saying we need to open the floodgates and allow all forms of drug advertising, but it definitely warrants further examination.
CNEWS World - Washington joins lobby to overturn Cal. clean fuel law
As if Washington's disgusting revision to EPA regulations wasn't enough, they're now interfering in California's attempt to clean up their own air:
CNEWS World - Washington joins lobby to overturn Cal. clean fuel lawApparently, the DoJ has entered the lawsuit claiming that California does not have the right to set its own emissions standards for new vehicles without consulting the EPA. What a piece of hogwash. California's not setting emissions standards, they're asking fleet operators to pick the cleanest vehicles and engines already available and approved by the EPA.
Is there no end to the Bushies love of gas-guzzling?
I don't think I thought this through very well
I was excited about coming back to school, but it hadn't sunk in that that meant having to study and prepare cases again. Doh!
Oops, I hadn't realized it had been so long since I'd written here. I guess with the move back to London and then getting together with friends I hadn't seen in a while, I just let it drop. I'll try not to let that happen too often during the school year.
Monkey Business: Swinging Through the Wall Street Jungle