Government sent me octobers retro-payed whatever benefits cheque, met up with 2 punk(ish) RD loc`s seen a moka only look alike, lots of asians and a chick dressed like a pirate. ugly 14 year old girls argued with eachother over who was the hot one among us, i won, sadly. copped this went home.

pretty dec. delta forces

Heute ist ein so schöner Tag, es scheint die Sonne und meine Kollegin und ich sitzen auf der Arbeit. Der Tag beginnt mit einigen Notfällen und die Zeit verrinnt trotzdem nicht. Irgendwann gegen Mittag bimmelt es zu einem Notfall. Zielort ist ein Altenheim ganz weit draußen. Auf unserer Alarmdepesche lesen wir,  Herr Müller hat ein chirurgisches Problem. Meistens entspinnt zwischen den Kollegen während der Anfahrt die Frage, was ist es diesmal!? Der eine tippt auf die häufig vorkommende Oberschenkelhalsfraktur, der andere auf eine Platzwunde. Diesmal wetten wir um einen Kaffee. Wir kommen an und packen unseren Kram und laufen in die angegebene Station. Schwester Ursula empfängt uns mit einem leichten Grinsen um die Mundwinkel. Ihr werdet nicht glauben was passiert ist! Wir beiden stehen etwas verdutzt da und Schwester Ursula lässt uns noch ein bisschen zappeln.  Herr Müller ist ein bisschen dement und hat bisher immer sein Zimmer wieder gefunden. Heute aber leider nicht. Statt in sein Zimmer nach dem Mittagessen zu gehen, verschwand er im Zimmer von Herrn Oswald. Dort legte er sich in dessen Bett um seinen Mittagsschlaf zu halten. Als Herr Oswald, der selbst auch dement ist, in sein Zimmer kam, staunte er wohl nicht schlecht. Er war wohl auch ziemlich überfordert, denn anstatt den ungebetenen Gast sanft auf seinen Fehler aufmerksam zu machen, nahm er den neben seinem Bett hängenden Bilderrahmen und zog diesen Herrn Müller über den Kopf. Wir mussten uns wirklich das Lachen sehr verkneifen. Die Platzwunde war schon vorbildlich versorgt, und so konnten wir Herr Müller zügig in unser Auto bringen. Nachdem wir unseren Patient in der Chirurgie übergeben hatten, bezahlte ich sehr gerne den fälligen Kaffee.

Willkommen auf meinem Blog.

Hi, this is RD.

Yes, I haven’t gotten around to that, have I? It’s a work in progress, I’m trying to tune it to the ideal man.  So let me put it this way:

I will love, even though it may at times be irrational. Heck, God loves you even though we condemned His Son to the crucifix. Or He condemned Jesus to the crucifix because He loves us. Either way.

I accept the fact that  cannot create, destroy, or change truth, and can only perceive and recount it. That, or lie. “Art is a lie that tells the truth,” said Blue Balliet. (It’s one of the exceptions to my “always tell the truth” principle.)

(insert Apostle’s Creed here)

I’ll revise this later, when I have time. Or add something in a later post.

RD

PS: I hate Ayn Rand.

The potential for science and innovation to help bring countries and companies out of the current economic crisis was highlighted at the 6th Annual Science and Innovation Conference held on 19 November in London.

The event gathered over 400 decision-makers (including MPs and Ministers), 20 speakers, and 20 exhibitors (including the UK Government Office for Science – headed by UK Chief Scientific Adviser John Beddington) and followed hot on the heels of the UK Finance Minister’s pledge to pump £750 million (€829 million) into the creation of emerging technologies, such as nanotechnology.

As the opportunities of science were being hotly debated in London, across the Channel the European Commission was conducting its third stakeholder dialogue with members of its scientific committees. The aim of this meeting was to promote dialogue between scientists advising the Commission on risk assessment and European-level stakeholders, with the Chairs of the respective committees briefing participants on their latest activities and suggesting possible themes on which risk assessments could be undertaken in future.

At first sight it may seem that these conferences are drastically different, with the Brits focusing on the bottom line and Brussels bureaucrats debating scientific terminology and scrutinising rules and procedures. Yet taken together these two events clearly demonstrate that science is beginning to emerge from the shadows and is seen as a driver – not a brake – to the EU’s economic progress.

Here’s to hoping that this message is taken onboard by decision-makers and that science and innovation in Europe are given the prominence they deserve!

http://www.venturewoods.org/index.php/2009/11/02/israel-leader-in-business-innovation/

US DOE
http://arpa-e.energy.gov/

[Press release] The Department of Energy today announced major funding for 37 ambitious research projects – including some that could allow intermittent energy sources like wind and solar to provide a steady flow of power, or use bacteria to produce automotive fuel from sunlight, water and carbon dioxide. ARPA-E was originally established under the America Competes Act of 2007. In April of this year, President Obama announced $400 million in initial funding for ARPA-E through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.

Just four days ago Nokia lay off 330 jobs in Finland, Denmark (R&D) and yet again today it is said to have cut around 220 R&D jobs in Japan. The reason behind this layoff is said to better align company’s operation with its focused portfolio. By all this we assume that Nokia would now focus on smaller number of more iconic devices going forward instead of 50 or more phones a year. The other reason we find behind this layoff is Nokia losing market share to other competitors especially Apple resulting in less profits as before. It should be noted this year alone Nokia layoff has reached more then 4000 employees world wide.

Finally …,

Although the watermark is a little bit annoying at least i can start playing with the sdmx file

Btw, if you new to flex, may be you can buy the following books and boost your career by adding flex to one of your expertise :

Programming Flex 3: The Comprehensive Guide to Creating Rich Internet Applications with Adobe Flex

Or

Flex 3 Cookbook (Adobe Developer Library)

Dans mon premier billet, j’ai mentionné qu’une prise de conscience marketing est nécessaire, et cela implique un changement de culture. Je présente ici deux paradigmes “classiques” qui limitent la pratique du marketing stratégique.

1. Le syndrome du « WOW EFFECT »

• Le marketing est une fonction créative qui doit séduire les clients, qui s’intéresseront à notre entreprise et au produit qu’on leur propose.
• Des clients impressionnés ou interpellés par l’originalité de l’approche de communication seront plus attentifs au discours de vente et plus enclins à acheter le produit.

 Quels sont les limites de cette conception (paradigme) du marketing ?

• Accorder trop d’importance à la créativité pénalise la conception du message de communication, qui se doit d’être pertinent pour les différentes clientèles cibles et qui doit communiquer les bénéfices recherchés les plus importants.
• De plus, la stratégie de communication qui mène à la conception du message s’appuie trop souvent sur des perceptions biaisées des attentes et besoins des clients, et sur une vision intuitive ou incomplète des opportunités de marché.
• Accorder trop d’importance à la créativité implique qu’on laisse plus de place à la communication graphique, au détriment du contenu, dans les outils de communication (publicités, brochures, pages web, …).
• Le visuel est important. Il ne faut pas en dire trop pour ne pas noyer notre message avec trop de textes. Mais ne pas en dire assez ne fera que susciter un intérêt éphémère, ou pire encore, pourrait confondre les clients.

2. Le pari risqué de l’approche « orientée produit »

• Beaucoup d’entreprises se fient trop à la force de leur produit pour générer des ventes.
• Elles misent également sur une force de vente performante pour pousser leur produit “supérieur” vers les clients.
• Un produit supérieur fait la différence, même si les concurrents ont d’excellents vendeurs, et même s’il ne comble pas tous les besoins des clients (!)

Quels sont les limites de cette approche (paradigme) du marketing ?

• Les marchés et les technologies évoluent à grande vitesse.  Les clients changent et deviennent plus sophistiqués dans leurs comportements d’achat.
• Il devient difficile pour la R&D d’anticiper avec précision l’évolution des marchés et de repérer les opportunités à exploiter pour développer les bons produits.
• Une compétition de plus en plus féroce provenant de l’étranger offre aux clients un plus grand choix de produits de qualité à prix compétitifs.
• Les vendeurs expérimentés ne peuvent pas toujours rivaliser avec une offre concurrente supérieure, malgré l’application de leurs meilleures tactiques de vente.

Tôt ou tard, les entreprises atteignent un point de saturation de leur croissance. Elles doivent revoir leur approche et repenser leur stratégie d’entreprise. Le marketing stratégique commence là.

Dans mon prochain billet, j’introduirai la notion de processus continu pour pratiquer le marketing stratégique B2B.

U.S. Senator Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) and U.S. Congressman Dave Camp (R-MI) announced the Solar Manufacturing Jobs Creation Act last week. The bi-partisan legislation will offer a tax credit to support solar manufacturing in the U.S. These tax incentives are designed to encourage U.S. companies to produce solar equipment, create green jobs and invest in a domestic clean energy economy. Senator Stabenow joined fellow Senators Robert Menendez (D-NJ) and Michael Bennet (D-CO) to introduce the legislation in the Senate. In addition, Congressman Camp will be introducing related legislation in the House later this month. The Solar Manufacturing bill will provide additional tax credits for solar equipment manufacturers that will help the U.S. compete in the global clean energy race with countries such as China, South Korea and Taiwan.

Currently, the United States is falling behind in the global market for solar technology, as other countries provide incentives to invest in solar manufacturing. According to the Solar Energy Industry Association, the U.S. produced more than 40 percent of the world’s solar photovoltaic (PV) cells a decade ago. In 2008, the U.S. produced only 5 percent of the world’s solar cells. As a result, U.S. Congressman Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ) authored the Solar Technology Roadmap Act, which is designed to support domestic research and development (R&D) and manufacturing.

Currently, a 30 percent federal Solar Investment Tax Credit (SITC) exists for the investment in or installation of solar power technology, which was extended in the Recovery Act. Under the Solar Manufacturing Jobs Creation Act, equipment and facilities used to manufacture solar power technology would be included in the property list for the SITC. These technologies include solar cells, silicon, evacuated tubes, and flat-plate solar collectors. It has been estimated that the tax credits in this legislation will generate 315,000 new domestic green jobs.

Although China produces over 30 percent of the world’s solar photovoltaics, installed PV in China only reached a total of 140 (megawatts) MW in 2008, according to the state-owned newspaper, China Daily, accounting for less than 1 percent of the global market share. Today, however, solar PV is starting to increase its share in China’s energy portfolio due to favorable government support, decreasing solar power generation costs, and rising demand in response to emerging regulations ongreenhouse gas emissions. In fact, China recently revised its 2020 target for solar power capacity from 1.8 gigawatts (GW) to 20 GW, according to a recent report by Beijing’s state-own China Daily.

In order to promote the Chinese solar market, the Government has enacted several policies to support the expanding industry, including a regional feed-in tariff (FIT) and national subsidies for solar PV installations, as similar policies in Germany and Spain facilitated their world leadership with respect to deployment in recent years.

These policies have had an impact in East China’s Jiangsu province, which is home to more than 160 Chinese PV manufacturers, including Suntech and Trina Solar. In June, the Jiangsu government approved a feed-in tariff program. As a result, the price offered for each kWh of electricity from PV solar farms, rooftop projects and building integrated photovoltaics projects built this year is US $0.31, $0.54 and $0.63, respectively, which nearly covers project costs, according to Renewable Energy World. Several leading PV manufacturers such as Suntech and Trina Solar have pursued the opportunity and developed 80-MW and 30-MW rooftop PV facilities, respectively. However, state solar incentives and expanding renewable energy portfolio standards are attracting foreign companies to manufacture solar products in the U.S as well. For instance, Suntech, who exhibited its solar products at the recent International Greenbuild Expo in Phoenix, Arizona recently announced it will build a solar panel plant in this area in response to the state’s new solar tax credit.

The Beijing-based China Electricity Power Research Institution has stated that China would fail to meet 6.4 percent of the country’s electricity demand in 2010 and 10.7 percent in 2020. Thus, solar PV is considered a vital source to cover the missing resources.

But as the U.S. remains slow to act in setting a national renewable energy portfolio standardcompared to other major countries or a cap-and-trade system to stimulate sufficient demand for solar and other forms of clean energy across the country, many domestic solar cell manufacturers recognize the increasing demand in China. For example, Evergreen Solar recently announced it will be outsourcing its solar panel assembly manufacturing line in Devens, Massachusetts to China. This statement was made years after it received $58 million in state aid and being lauded by Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick as a symbol of the state’s economic future. The announcement came as the company announced that it lost $167 million in the first nine months of this year. Approximately half of the 577 full-time and 230 contract employees at the Devens factory involved in panel assembly are expected to be laid off. Thus, this issue only strengthens the need for detailed national and state legislation without loopholes allowing companies to capitalize on incentives without making a long-term investment.

In order to deal with similar situations and to institute a balanced U.S.-China trade partnership, U.S. President Barack Obama and Chinese President Hu Jintao announced a comprehensive clean energy agreement between the two countries during their joint talks this week. The two Presidents revealed several new programs including a new U.S.-China Renewable Energy Partnership. Under the Partnership, the two countries will develop roadmaps for large-scale renewable energy deployment in both countries. The Partnership will also provide technical and analytical resources to states and regions in both countries to support renewable energy installations and will facilitate state-to-state and region-to-region collaborations to share experience and best practices. A new Advanced Grid Working Group will bridge U.S. and Chinese policymakers, regulators, industry leaders, and civil society to initiate strategies for grid modernization in both countries. A new U.S.-China Renewable Energy Forum will be held annually as well.

In addition, the two presidents announced the creation of a new U.S.-China Clean Energy Research Center. The Center will facilitate collaborative R&D in clean energy technologies by teams of scientists and engineers from the U.S. and China. Furthermore, this Center will be supported by public and private funding of at least $150 million over five years and be split equally between the two countries. Initial research priorities will be focused on building energy efficiency, clean coal including carbon capture and storage, and clean vehicle technology using advanced batteries and biofuels.

Similarly, a U.S.-China Energy Cooperation Program (ECP) will be established. This particular program will capitalize on private sector resources for project development work in China across a wide spectrum of clean energy projects, to the advancement of both nations. More than 22 companies are already listed as founding members of the program. The ECP will include collaborative projects on renewable energy, smart grid, clean transportation, green building, clean coal, combined heat and power, and energy efficiency.

Overall, the new U.S.-China partnership coupled with the Solar Manufacturing Jobs Creation Act will enhance America’s competitiveness in the clean energy race- not to become simply be a consumer of renewables to meet emissions standards, but a producer as well.

Source:http://www.examiner.com/x-8178-Phoenix-Green-Business-Examiner~y2009m11d18-New-clean-energy-policies-target-US-China-trade-balance

from http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa654.pdf

None of the best-known studies factor in the contribution of various countries to the advances that have come to characterize the current practice of health care in the developed world.

Every single health care test or treatment must be invented at some point. We would be living in a different world today were it not for the remarkable genius and hard work of health care inventors in the past, as well as investments from government health agencies and pharmaceutical and medical device companies. The health care issues commonly considered most important today—controlling costs and covering the uninsured—arguably should be regarded as secondary to innovation, inasmuch as a treatment must first be invented before its costs can be reduced and its use extended to everyone. But shouldn’t innovation show up in other health care measures? If the United States is making the most headway in creating cancer medications, for instance, then shouldn’t cancer care be better in the United States? Not necessarily. Most innovations are created by only a few people, but once created they can generally be used all over the world. For example, the bulk of the development of balloon angioplasty was done by a handful of physicians—most notably Andreas Greutzig in Switzerland, with some help from U.S. physicians. Once developed, however, this procedure was used well beyond these two countries to improve the care of patients with heart attacks. Similarly, the work of Michael Brown and Joseph Goldstein at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center was essential to the development of the cholesterol drugs called statins, which have helped to reduce deaths from strokes and heart attacks all over the world.

Therefore, measuring health care costs and health outcomes across countries is not sufficient.The costs of medical innovation typically appear only in the innovating nation’s health expenditures, but the health improvements that those innovations generate improve the health-outcomes statistics of many countries. Consider, for example, the frequent claim that European health systems achieve similar health outcomes to those of the United States at a much lower cost. That claim fails to consider that higher U.S. spending levels could be generating innovations that improve health outcomes in Europe and around the world. If we care about progress,we should include innovation as a separate measure, so that policymakers can adequately factor innovation into discussions of health care reform.

Although we have focused on the most significant pharmaceutical innovations, similar results seem to hold for new drugs in general. In a 2006 article, economists Henry G. Grabowski and Y. Richard Wang compiled a list of all drugs introduced to the world market between 1982 and 2003 and divided them by country of origin. Although European firms introduced a greater total number of new drugs to the global market than American
firms did, they introduced a similar number of new drugs relative to population. With respect to first-in-class drugs (which are, in general, more innovative), American firms produced a greater number than European firms, despite Europe’s larger population. The difference between American and European performance was more pronounced during the latter half of the time period. Only time will tell which of these drugs will prove most beneficial to patients, but these data provide at least preliminary evidence that American firms continue to contribute significantly to the development of innovative pharmaceuticals.

Explaining America’s Leading Role

Why is the United States over-represented in the development of new diagnostics and therapeutics? What factors encourage innovation in these areas? Perhaps a part of it is the quality of the innovators. But this answer is unsatisfying, for it only leads to more questions: Why does the United States attract high-quality innovators? And what environmental factors allow innovators in the United States to be so productive? Although many factors are surely relevant, one likely contributor is differences in monetary compensation. Other things being equal, individuals and firms will tend to invest more in medical innovation when (a) they expect a larger return; (b) the returns will last for a longer period of time; and (c) the returns arrive sooner rather than later.

There is little doubt that the United States is responsible for a disproportionate share of the monetary returns to medical innovation. In recent years, the United States has accounted for 45 percent of worldwide pharmaceutical sales, as compared to Europe’s 27–31 percent and Japan’s 9–12 percent. The population of Europe is 150 percent that of the United States, and Japan 42 percent, so the greater contribution of the United States cannot be attributed to its large population. The fact is that Americans spend more per capita on pharmaceuticals. Critics often describe this as a defect of the American system—but with regard to encouraging innovation, we must consider it a feature.

National Academy of Sciences. Committee for Study on Transportation Research Programs to Address Energy and Climate Change, Transportation Research Board. registration required
http://tinyurl.com/yzjh9dv

[Description] In reviewing proposals for transportation research programs as part of reauthorizing the federal surface transportation program, the Transportation Research Board recognized a gap: no proposals explicitly addressed research to mitigate GHG emissions and energy consumption attributable to passenger and freight travel or to adapt to climate change. A Transportation Research Program for Mitigating and Adapting to Climate Change and Conserving Energy is the product of a study to suggest research programs to fill this and other perceived gaps.

Specifically, this book identifies research needs with regard to policies and strategies relating to the use of the transportation system and to assist infrastructure owners in adapting to climate change; focuses on research programs that could provide guidance to officials at all levels responsible for policies that affect the use of surface transportation infrastructure and its operation, maintenance, and construction; and aims to help officials begin to adapt the infrastructure to climate changes that are already occurring or that are expected to occur in the next several decades.

by Frank Priscaro

Last month, an article on www.PhysOrg.com, “New methods are changing old materials,” by David L. Chandler, showcased some of the important research being done in the field of computational material science. The article described work being done at MIT to model the composition of concrete at the atomic level, thereby getting some insight into that material’s behavior over time. The people at MIT are particularly keen to understand the properties of cement liner and sandstone overlay of MIT’s Great Dome.

 Good thing, too. Concrete just happens to be the most abundant substance on this planet, after water. And even though we’ve been using it since the Romans invented it thousands of years ago (seems the volcanic pumice in the region made for an excellent binding agent), we still don’t know very much about how it behaves. So knowing how it’s going with all that grey matter lying around is going to be essential to managing its lifecycle and not being unpleasantly surprised when it begins to fall apart.

 I can think of a couple of important applications (at least to me) right off the top of my head. Since I live in California and spend a good bit of my life in the car, how about developing a “pothole-resistant” strain for city streets, or even a “quiet-ride” variety for freeways? Last post, I talked about the condition of the steel in our aging bridges, but I have to believe the condition of some of that concrete isn’t much better. Who doesn’t get a queasy feeling driving over a bridge and seeing an inordinate amount of crumbled concrete at various critical junctures? Although almost all of these bridges and roads were built before the computational material science technology was developed to really understand how they behave, there’s no reason in the world why that technology shouldn’t be applied now. It’s here, and it could be a vital tool for helping inspectors predict and prevent catastrophic failures. That technology is only going to get better, too, as more and more research on more and more materials is done, and we at VEXTEC applaud and encourage their efforts of MIT and other academic institutions. Concrete and steel may have been around for thousands of years, but now that we’ve developed the ability to understand them, it’s time to use it to do some serious remodeling, in every sense of the word.

– Frank Priscaro

Dateline: Havana

Havana? Yes, I’m blogging from Havana, where I am attending the Global Forum for Health Research Annual Conference. This year’s theme—“Innovating for the Health of All”—is perfectly in line with our goals at BVGH to bring capable innovators and technological know-how to global health research and development. Even more exciting, the Forum’s location in Cuba is drawing attention to Latin America at exactly the right moment.

Why does Latin America deserve all eyes and ears right now?

First, a number of diseases endemic to Latin America and the Caribbean are, at long last, gaining important publicity. The poster child example of this is Chagas disease, which was discovered in 1909 by Carlos Chagas, a medical doctor in Brazil. The disease now affects more than 8 million in Latin America and approximately 300,000 in the United States. For decades, the disease was systematically ignored by researchers and patients were offered little in the way of effective treatment. The only drugs that exist today, nifurtimox and benznidazole, both have high toxicities and long treatment times. There is no point of care diagnostic and no test of cure. However, this neglect is beginning to change. Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) and the Drugs for Neglected Diseases initiative (DNDi) have embarked on an advocacy campaign around the issue. DNDi is also building a pipeline of drugs to test against the parasite that causes Chagas disease and to help identify clinical trials capacity for drug trials. BVGH is working behind the scenes to make sure that important compounds make it to the relevant players in drug development. The synergy in the global health community around the need to find new and better drugs and diagnostics for Chagas disease—and to treat those patients already affected—makes now an important time for the global health community to gather in Latin America to focus on the need for innovation.

More importantly, Latin America now has a thriving biopharmaceutical sector. Brazil’s well-known generics industry has a long history of success, and public sector research institutions, such as Fiocruz, have strong vaccine capabilities. Fiocruz is building a new translational research facility, and already has an alliance with Genzyme on Chagas disease. In addition, Brazilian President Lula has made innovation a pillar of public policy during his term as president. While Brazil has long been recognized for its growing technological capabilities, other countries in Latin America stand out as well. Mexico is among one of the top ten drug producers in the world, and remains the largest drug exporter in Latin America ($1.5 billion in exports in 2007). In both Brazil and Mexico, there is a growing interesting in innovative pharmaceuticals.

Sadly, less than USD 1 million was spent last year on research and development (R&D) for new drugs for Chagas. But there is a real opportunity here for capable innovators with compounds that could be tested for activity against Chagas to join in the movement that will only grow. These large, mid-size, or small companies could, in partnership, reduce their risks of development. An R&D incentive would also certainly help to fill up the pipeline quickly with a newer generation of drugs. The innovation process that creates novel compounds from good research ideas is still largely not found in the developing world, as was discussed in a very interesting forum held Monday by the Pan American Health Organization. The space is open for drug hunting companies and diagnostic companies to step into. Our Board chair Carl Feldbaum, our VP of Business Development David Cook, former BVGH CEO Chris Earl, and I spent a fair amount of time discussing the value that BVGH could add to solving the problem of Chagas, which causes so much suffering in Latin America. Fueled by cigar smoke (Yes—I did!) we see the opportunity. If you want to see it too—please be in touch with us.

–Melinda Moree is the interim CEO of BVGH

You can contact BVGH by emailing info@bvgh.org, or by calling 202-312-9260.