Home' Technology Review : January 2005 Contents 20
Genomics technology and science were
supposed to unleash a cornucopia of
powerful new drugs. Bill Haseltine---who
stepped down in October as the chair-
man and CEO of Rockville, MD--based
Human Genome Sciences---explains why
that hasn t happened.
By all accounts, massive investments in
genomics-based drug research haven t
paid o . Why?
Productivity has actually declined at vir-
tually every big pharmaceutical company.
We ve traded constraints on dr ug discov-
ery for constraints on drug development.
Was the promise of genomics-based tools
It s not a science question. The current
methods of dr ug development are still
structured for another age.
You have a better idea?
Outsource the whole process to special-
ists---discovery, development, manufac-
turing, clinical trials. The skills that used
to be housed in a few big pharmaceutical
companies are now widely distributed
around the globe. You manage it with
So do what a lot of the semiconductor in-
dustry has done---go virtual?
Dr ug targets are best developed based on
scienti c knowledge, which generally
means an academic setting. A virtual or
semivirtual company can take a group of
those and coördinate the best providers at
each stage, wherever they are. Most in-
dustries began seeing this long ago. That s
where I want to put my energy now.
Would you go o shore?
They re doing great work now in China,
India, and Eastern Europe. And in many
disease categories, you don t want to do
trials in the United States because there
are simply not enough patients, and the
FDA is---I don t think "obstr uctionist" is
quite the right word, but in practice, that
is the e ect.
Alzheimer s research---you ve been bang-
ing a drum for it. Anything to do with
Alzheimer s is where AIDS was in 1985---
the fundamental knowledge base is there.
But whereas with AIDS there may be ten
di erent therapeutic approaches, we have
twice that number for Alzheimer s. It s a
problem that s ready to be solved.
Drug Development Is Virtually Dead
Air Cargo Insecurity
• 11.3 million metric tons of cargo passed
through U.S. airports in 2003.
• Less than 10 percent of it was screened for
• 100 percent of air passengers and their
baggage are screened for explosives.
• Virtually all passenger flights carry air cargo.
• American Airlines spent $70 million to
provide more legroom in coach class.
• Boeing spent $1 billion to launch a satellite-
powered, high-speed in-flight Internet service.
• The U.S. Department of Homeland Security
will spend $4.8 billion this year on passenger
and baggage screening.
• It will spend $115 million on air cargo
• Last year, two-thirds of the U.S. Department
of Homeland Security s transportation security
R&D budget went to technology for countering
attacks on commercial aircraft with shoulder-
launched surface-to-air missiles.
• The United States has 6.3 million kilome-
ters of roads, more than 160,000 kilometers
of rail, nearly 600,000 bridges, more than 300
ports, and approximately 500 railroad stations.
SOURCES: U.S. TRANSPORTATION SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, ABI
RESEARCH, BOEING COMMERCIAL AIRPLANES GROUP, GAO, U.S.
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, AND AMERICAN AIRLINES
SOURCE: IDC, 2004
In the Workplace, It s BYO PDA
Who uses a PDA at work?
Who pays for it?
Personal digital assistants increasingly constitute an ad hoc component of the
workplace information infrastructure---and are often unsupported, unintegrated,
and insecure. Eighty percent of nurses, for example, purchase their own PDAs to
use on the job, according to a Spyglass Consulting Group survey. They re not alone:
research by IDC shows that only about half of companies are footing the whole bill
for workers who use handheld devices.
Food, building maintenance,
and other services.
nance, and repair
writing, and other
to employee at
company reimburses partially
Links Archive February 2005 Navigation Previous Page Next Page