<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Vaccines Force Their Way off Pharma&#8217;s Back Burner, as Price Increases Help Fuel New Wave of Innovation</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.xconomy.com/seattle/2008/12/12/vaccines-force-their-way-off-pharmas-back-burner-as-price-increases-help-fuel-new-wave-of-innovation/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.xconomy.com/seattle/2008/12/12/vaccines-force-their-way-off-pharmas-back-burner-as-price-increases-help-fuel-new-wave-of-innovation/</link>
	<description>Business + Technology in the Exponential Economy</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 Nov 2009 22:30:41 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Stewart</title>
		<link>http://www.xconomy.com/seattle/2008/12/12/vaccines-force-their-way-off-pharmas-back-burner-as-price-increases-help-fuel-new-wave-of-innovation/comment-page-1/#comment-42872</link>
		<dc:creator>Stewart</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 14 Dec 2008 19:01:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.xconomy.com/?p=6857#comment-42872</guid>
		<description>I agree that this was an interesting event; hopefully Xconomy will sponsor more events like it. I would have liked to have heard how much money the government spends on bio-defense vaccines (smallpox, hoof and mouth, anthrax) vs. how much they spend on the other types of vaccines we heard about. It would also have been nice if each speaker had at the outset described either the five most important developments that will drive advances in the field, or the five biggest impediments to success, or something like that. This would have helped frame their comments and given a fuller perspective to audience members, who likely represent a wide diversity of scientific backgrounds. Good start!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree that this was an interesting event; hopefully Xconomy will sponsor more events like it. I would have liked to have heard how much money the government spends on bio-defense vaccines (smallpox, hoof and mouth, anthrax) vs. how much they spend on the other types of vaccines we heard about. It would also have been nice if each speaker had at the outset described either the five most important developments that will drive advances in the field, or the five biggest impediments to success, or something like that. This would have helped frame their comments and given a fuller perspective to audience members, who likely represent a wide diversity of scientific backgrounds. Good start!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Richard</title>
		<link>http://www.xconomy.com/seattle/2008/12/12/vaccines-force-their-way-off-pharmas-back-burner-as-price-increases-help-fuel-new-wave-of-innovation/comment-page-1/#comment-42754</link>
		<dc:creator>Richard</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 13 Dec 2008 09:01:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.xconomy.com/?p=6857#comment-42754</guid>
		<description>This was a very energizing meeting, especially after so much disheartening news the past year regarding some of the major companies in Seattle (i.e. Rosetta). 

At the networking session after the panel, there was a nice mix of people who were relatively recent additions to Seattle&#039;s biotech endeavors along with the more long-term members of the biotech community. This resulted in an interesting observation dealing with changes in the biotech  business just in the last few years.

Companies such as Immunex, Icos, Zymo and others have had sustainable business models based on possessing both strong research and strong development skill sets, usually involving hundreds of people.

Now, these skill sets seem to have been split amongst two groups -  Seattle&#039;s non-profit research centers (FHRC, IDRI, PATH, SDRI, etc.) have filled the research side, leaving most companies, with fewer people, to focus on the development side.

Time will tell if this is a sustainable model or not. I would imagine it will be interesting to observe.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This was a very energizing meeting, especially after so much disheartening news the past year regarding some of the major companies in Seattle (i.e. Rosetta). </p>
<p>At the networking session after the panel, there was a nice mix of people who were relatively recent additions to Seattle&#8217;s biotech endeavors along with the more long-term members of the biotech community. This resulted in an interesting observation dealing with changes in the biotech  business just in the last few years.</p>
<p>Companies such as Immunex, Icos, Zymo and others have had sustainable business models based on possessing both strong research and strong development skill sets, usually involving hundreds of people.</p>
<p>Now, these skill sets seem to have been split amongst two groups &#8211;  Seattle&#8217;s non-profit research centers (FHRC, IDRI, PATH, SDRI, etc.) have filled the research side, leaving most companies, with fewer people, to focus on the development side.</p>
<p>Time will tell if this is a sustainable model or not. I would imagine it will be interesting to observe.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
