Posts Tagged ‘health’

In my opinion Dr Jan Lundberg is one of those legendary scientific superstars, who starts a project with the end in mind and who carries out much of his work based on high quality science, both basic and clinical.   Dr Lundberg has been drug discovery chief at AstraZeneca for the last 10 years and is moving to lead R&D for Lilly, which can only mean great things for the future of the Indianapolis drug maker.

Eli Lilly announced that Jan Lundberg is to become executive vice president, science and technology, and president, Lilly Research Laboratories, replacing Steven Paul who retires at the end of February 2010.

Dr Lundberg is one of a few long standing industry experts that has built his reputation, somewhat un-intentionally and modestly, through a consistent approach to delivering strategy, insight and direction to some of the industry’s most challenging hurdles. Dr Lundberg has embraced new technology, new discovery techniques and has led key business deals to seek out and discover molecules with the most potential to reach the market, making a difference to future therapeutics.

Who knows what Lilly will move into or advance with next? The strategic fit is obvious, with Lilly long being one of the industry’s front runners as the ‘partner of choice’, with a central focus on innovation and an open approach to accessing it, be it through in-house discovery or in-licensing. Dr Lundberg shares a drive and courage to seek out and harness innovation, having struck deals with direct competitors Bristol Myers Squibb and Merck for example, with a view to finding lead compounds with the potential to go all the way to market.

One thing is certain; Dr Lundberg will be greatly missed by the Stockholm/Uppsala biomedical cluster, which contributes more than any other Swedish region to the nation’s international reputation. Dr Lundberg has been a prominent feature in the positive growth and strengthening of AstraZeneca’s commercial and scientific achievements which has in turn, elevated Sweden’s position on a global scale as a lead player in scientific innovation and expertise.
Congratulations Lilly, for netting a terrific catch.

Good luck Dr Lundberg, I look forward to following your future successes.

Watch this space…

One story that dominated the nationals this weekend were results from a recent draft report by the Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition (SACN) which concluded that the current daily calorie intake- 2,500 for men and 2,000 for women- may be wrong.  SACN are now suggesting that the recommended daily intake could be increased by up to 16%.

But surely this will lead to serious misinterpretation?

According the The Times on Saturday, 60% of us are already eating more than our daily allowance.  In addition, Amanda Ursell, nutritionist and writer for The Times, suggests that those people currently maintaining a normal and steady weight consuming the current daily allowance, could gain up to two stone in a year by following the new suggested intake!  Currently the NHS is spending an estimated £4.2 billion on over-weight and obese individuals, a figure that could rise dramatically, should these new guidelines be put in place.

Worryingly, it won’t be those maintaining a healthy weight who take any notice of the increase in daily allowance.  Unfortunately many of the 60% already eating over the daily allowance, who may be unaware of how many calories they are consuming, may start to think it’s ok to eat an extra two packets of crisps a day, fuelling the forever growing ‘obesity crisis’ in the UK.

Should this report really be taken seriously?  Should the National Obesity Forum not be trying to persuade people not to believe this outrageous new proposal?

The media is reporting a survey by health campaign group Consensus Action on Salt & Health (CASH) which shows that some pasta sauces on sale in the UK are saltier than sea water. A good hook for a survey but bad news for celebrity chef Jamie Oliver, whose spicy olive and garlic pasta sauce topped the poll with a whacking 3 grams of salt per 100g.

This looks to have been a brand extension too far. Jamie is a brand and brands need to deliver on their promise. Over the years, he has been the front man for campaigns on better school dinners, healthier eating, animal welfare, creating employment for disadvantaged young people, apple pie and more. Today’s news is at odds with his wholesome image. What is to be done? His team will be working to focus attention on their man’s good deeds. But while they control the brand, they don’t own Jamie’s reputation. His public image will be dented. Will his sales be hit? Certainly, expect a new recipe pasta sauce to be rushed out and to hear updates on his campaigning efforts. But when his next campaign is launched with television series, website and spin-off book, his public might just take it all with a pinch of salt.

Meanwhile, the celebrity cook market remains big business, particularly in the run up to Christmas. A quick search of the web shows that today Jamie can sell you:

Jamie Oliver salt and pepper mills

Jamie Oliver salt pig and scoop

Jamie Oliver pop-up salt mill

Jamie Oliver salt kilner jar

That just rubs salt in the wound.

A couple of weeks ago, I questioned the wisdom behind a series of ads comparing HIV/AIDS to mass murderers such as Hitler, Stalin and Saddam and whether campaigns using shock tactics like this work.

Well this week, the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene (what exactly is mental hygiene by the way) has released this poster which has apparently come under some fire.

As you can see, it is an ad highlighting the danger of sugary drinks which are a significant contributor to obesity and other disease such as diabetes.

The fact is this ad is shocking, the marbled, blood vessel laden fat isn’t a particularly nice image, but unlike the HIV campaign, it doesn’t potentially vilify anyone and it could very well raise awareness of the issue. Maybe, this ad could work.

I would love to know your thoughts.

The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) has been a source of much debate since it first came into being in 2005 with the remit to assess medicines.  Initially it was denied that its role was to focus on cost effectiveness, but this has now long been acknowledged.

The spotlight on NICE continued in this morning’s media with articles such as this one in the Guardian.  This reported on the Health Minister’s recommendations to overhaul the current NICE system with the claim that this would provide faster, fairer access to new drugs and treatments.

While this is good news in that the assessments will be more focused and faster, these new measures fail to address increasing concerns around how NICE carries out its assessments.  As recent successful appeals against its recommendations including those for Alzheimer’s, osteoporosis and rheumatoid arthritis have shown, there are valid concerns about the procedures used and NICE’s transparency around them.  These include the refusal by NICE to share the economic models on which they have based their decisions and more recently, their failure to follow their own process.

NICE will always face challenges to its recommendations, but while the government is reviewing this organisation, surely it should be taking a more fundamental look at how it actually carries out its assessment.  It seems illogical to be driving for an increasing number of assessments, when how they are carried out may be crucially flawed.

We have the Queen’s Speech today marking the State Opening of Parliament in which the Queen will outline the Government’s legislative programme for the coming year.

So, what can we expect?

This year, the speech is more about what is not in it rather than what is.

Traditionally, Governments push through contentious legislation in the early years of a Parliament and reserve a light and popular programme for the year(s) running into the General Election.

Some controversial legislation has been dropped from the Speech and some elements of the media have concentrated more on these measures than those that will be included.

We are assisted in our guesswork by the pre-legislative statement made by the Government earlier this year and by the extraordinary “pre”-Budget statement last week which was a Budget in all but name.

We can assume that the economic rescue and mitigation packages announced in the pre-Budget statement will be reserved for the Budget itself (some of these measures have already been passed by secondary orders) so it is unlikely that we will see a comprehensive economic measure being announced today.

Banking regulation however, is being rushed through to stop banks calling in loans or changing conditions without proper notice. The Government will confirm that the banks’ voluntary code is being made compulsory. Perhaps legislation is a better way to introduce this than simply raising it at the shareholders’ meeting.

The centrepiece will certainly be the Welfare Reform Bill which will require the unemployed to undergo skills assessments and incapacity benefit claimants to be medically assessed…but these are not particularly new measures.

What will make this Bill stand out are the controversial provisions to force benefit claimants to undergo lie detector tests, to force single parents into work and possibly cut welfare benefit of those refusing job offers, all of which will set the Government on a collision course with the Unions and libertarian groups.

Also included will be the Crime Bill designed to stop happy hour (or excessive drinking anyway) and bring changes to the prostitution laws to criminalise the purchaser of sexual favours rather than the supplier.

There will be a Health Bill to introduce the long-awaited NHS Constitution and to promote public health initiatives.

Along with an Equality Bill to introduce more stringent anti-discriminatory legislation and the Citizenship Bill to require immigrants to learn English, these will be the main measures announced today.

Among the Bills being dropped is the Data Communications Bill which would have recorded the details of everyone’s emails, mobile phone calls and text messages. There will be a consultation instead.

The Bill of Rights, which would include further reform of the House of Lords, The Coroners’ Bill which provided for inquests to be held in private (without juries) where intercept evidence as used have also been dropped.

All of this though may be overshadowed by any demonstration by the Conservatives following the arrest of Damien Green.

We shall have to wait and see.

Although most commentators still plump for 2010, we shall have to wait and see if this is the precursor to a 2009 General Election.