| |
 |
Prospering in a Down Market: Strategies for Life Science Suppliers
|
Report #09-001
Publication Date: March 2009
Page Count: 159
Print Copy: $3,200
Electronic Copy (includes print copy): $5,200
plus Data Set: an additional $1,200
|
Each member of The Science Advisory Board who participated in this study was invited to comment on the following questions. The responses, which have been edited for grammar and clarity, appear below along with each respondent’s job position.
Question 14:
Compared to other sectors of the economy, how do you believe the life sciences will fair during this recession? (chose only one)
q14 "1" Better
q14 "2" Same
q14 "3" Worse
q14 "4" Do not know
Please elaborate as to why you believe this to be so.
4 It's easy to cut money from the federal budget by decreasing the NIH budget. But we now have a president to whom science is important.
Staff Scientist/Academic
1 Government-funding research should at least hold steady under the new administration. Drug development research is funded by private R&D spending and not usually directly tied to the macro-economic downturn. Nonetheless, the industry, for various other reasons, is facing hard times and research spending could be cut back.
Staff Scientist/Biotechnology Company
4 It's hard to say, given the shakiness of the economy on a weekly basis.
Staff Scientist/Pharmaceutical Company
1 I feel that there is a 1-2 year lag between research funding cuts and their impact on laboratories operating budgets. If the economy does not turn around in the next 6 months, next year will be tough.
Staff Scientist/Academic
1 Everyone still gets sick and needs medicine. Money from pharma should be constant. I think people give money to life sciences when they want to increase their quality of life.
Staff Scientist/Hospital or University Medical Center
1 I think the general public is in favor of life sciences research and know how it is important in the health care industry. There is a lot of people in this sector and no one is earning millions in salary dollars unlike the banking industry. Also, every dollar that is invested into scientific research returns several dollars into the local economies. It is a good use of tax-payer dollars, unlike Obama's bailout plan.
Post Doctoral Fellow/Academic
1 Increased NIH budget.
Principal Investigator Academic
1 Health needs are not directly tied to the economy and thus less likely to take major decreases.
Professor/Academic
2 I don't expect federal funds for life sciences to decrease under this administration.
Teacher/Academic
3 People will not see the value in basic research as its results are not immediately translated into clinical usage.
Professor/Academic
And many more..
Question 25:
Is your lab planning to purchase capital equipment (i.e., costing more than $25,000) in the following product categories in FY2009 and/or FY2010? (choose only one for each)
If yes, what major criterion does your lab use to justify the purchase of capital equipment (i.e., more than $25,000)? (please elaborate)
Yes. The relationship which we have with the supplier as well as the price which they are willing to negotiate with the university procurement office.
Staff Scientist/Academic
Yes. If it makes our assays faster and more reproducible. If we have it budgeted in a grant that is funded. If it allows us to have a new capability not available in the lab or department.
Principal Investigator/Academic
Yes. Throughput is the criterion. We also service a number of labs on our campus as we function (at least in part) as a core facility.
Principal Investigator/Academic
Yes. Cost savings versus sending samples to an external lab. Payback needs to be 3 years or less.
Staff Scientist/Medical Device/Diagnostics
Yes. We have to justify what will happen if we don't purchase the piece of capital equipment - what will be the effect of failing to purchase.
Staff Scientist/Biotechnology Company
Yes. Assay development needs.
Staff Scientist/Pharmaceutical Company
Yes. All major purchases are made on a shared basis with other labs.
Professor/Academic
And many more..
Question 44:
Despite this economic recession, is your lab planning on adopting new technologies this year? Why or why not? (please elaborate)
If so, which technology(ies) will your lab will be adopting?
No, we do not have the budget to take on additional initiatives.
Staff Scientist/Academic
Yes, we have to stay competitive.
Omics.
Principal Investigator/Academic
Yes, I am expanding from primarily biochemical experiments on purified proteins to more physiological, cell-based research.
siRNA, fluorescence microscopy-based measurements.
Professor/ Academic
Yes. Collaboration is the word for this year. We need to use a fairly expensive new technology, and instead of hiring a post-doc and buying an expensive instrument, we will be collaborating with a neighboring lab that is talented in the area of research.
Mass-spectrometric analysis of biomarkers.
Post Doctoral Fellow/Academic
Yes, we are adopting new technologies that will provide cost savings over the older technologies. New genotyping platform with a lower cost per SNP than our current technology.
Lab Director/Biotechnology Company
Yes, our lab is investigating new ways to use existing equipment - i.e., working smarter. This often involved cross-disciplinary cooperation to develop new methods using instruments in ways that are less conventional.
Microwave processing is a new technology for extractions we have performed. We are now expanding this role to include high speed / high temperature reaction processes. We are also revising the role of thermal analytical methods, infrared spectroscopic methods and electron microscopic methods to expand their applications to support product development and manufacturing activities.
Staff Scientist/Medical Device/Diagnostics
And many more..
Question 45:
Do you think your research or the research in your field will change due to policies implemented by the new presidential administration? Why or why not? (please elaborate)
If so, what changes do you anticipate?
No, basic science is not politically-dependent.
Lab Director/Academic
No, our research is fairly non-controversial unless SD rats are put on the endangered list.
Post Doctoral Fellow/Academic
Not sure, but If the funding for science is increased, it will have a dramatic effect as it will stabilize science in academia again. More faculty engaged in science in medical schools and not driven too much into clinical work, and increased support for the basic scientist.
Principal Investigator/Academic
Yes, I suspect that the new administration will turn around the downward trend in the NIH budget. I suspect we will return to the growth of the NIH we enjoyed 5 years ago and in the decade prior.
Principal Investigator/Academic
Yes, very likely. The kind of research we do is valued by the Obama administration. The Bush administration frankly did not want to know about the results of ecological research, in particular, and limited funding in this area.
Principal Investigator/Academic
And many more..
|
|
