یه خبر قدیمی

مراسم اعطای لوح تقدیر و جایزه به برندگان ایرانی جایزه “محققان جوان بیوتکنولوژی قرن بیست و یکم” (BIO AWARD 2007) در دانشگاه تربیت مدرس برگزار شد. این جایزه از سوی سازمان جهانی بهداشت به جوانان محقق زیر 40 سال که در زمینه‌های تشخیص، پیشگیری و درمان بیماری‌ها در کشورهای در حال توسعه فعالیت دارند، اعطا می‌شود. هدف از این جایزه تشویق جوانان محقق به انجام تحقیقات کاربردی و مرتبط با بخش صنعت و سازمان‌های غیردولتی است. به گزارش ایسنا، در این دوره محققان جوانی از دانشکده علوم پزشکی دانشگاه تربیت مدرس، انستیتو پاستور ایران و موسسه تحقیقات واکسن و سرم‌سازی رازی موفق به دریافت این جایزه در بخش‌های مختلف شدند. در این راستا “صمد امینی بابلی اولیانی” از انستیتو پاستور ایران در بخش بیوتکنولوژی، نفر اول و برنده جایزه سه هزار یورویی؛ “رامین صرامی فروشانی” از انستیتو پاستور ایران در رشته بیوتکنولوژی، برنده جایزه دوم دو هزار یورویی؛ و “نرگس خرازانی تفرشی” در رشته ژنتیک برنده جایزه سوم هزار یورویی در زمینه تشخیص معرفی شدند. همچنین در زمینه پیشگیری، “محمد مجید ابراهیمیگ” از موسسه تحقیقات واکسن و سرم‌سازی رازی نفر اول و برنده جایزه دوهزار یورویی؛ “مجید گل کار” از انستیتو پاستور ایران در رشته انگل‌شناسی برنده جایزه دوم هزار یورویی و “حبیب الله پایکاری” از موسسه تحقیقات واکسن و سرم سازی رازی در رشته انگل شناسی برنده جایزه سوم هزار یورویی شدند. در زمینه درمان نیز “فاطمه طباطبایی” از دانشگاه تربیت مدرس در رشته انگل‌شناسی جایزه اول سه هزار یورویی؛ “رضا قاسمی خواه” از دانشگاه تربیت مدرس در رشته انگل‌شناسی جایزه دوم دو هزار یورویی و “فاطمه غفاری فر” عضو هیات علمی دانشگاه تربیت مدرس جایزه سوم هزار یورویی را دریافت کردند. منبع خبر: سایت کتاب نیوز

The Ethics of Biowarfare

Daniel Reyes

articlehighlights

Nations need to take preventative measures to curb the development and proliferation of biological and chemical weapons, such as:

• adopting a scientific code of ethics
• incorporating ethics into graduate science courses
• formulating accountability mechanisms for research
• raising academic, industry, and public awareness of ethical issues

Introduction: A Modern Day Trojan Horse

Although the envelope resembled a letter from a fourth grade student, the contents addressed to U.S. Senator Tom Daschle were life threatening. Laced within the envelope was a form of the bacteria known as Bacillus Anthracis, bacteria more commonly known as anthrax. When exposed to humans, an anthrax infection leads to the release of toxins, which if not properly treated are fatal.¹ Around the same time of Senator Daschle’s threat, other cases of anthrax exposure were publicized. Through these events, the public was introduced to a new terror — chemical and biological weapons.

Some call such weaponry “the poor man’s atomic bomb” — its construction is cheaper and its effects are potentially as far-reaching and devastating. The ability to manufacture chemical or biological threats is relatively much easier and its availability more widespread that nuclear weapons. Because of this, many believe any future terrorist attacks might include biological/chemical weapons similar to anthrax. Though seemingly a new threat, similar weaponry has been the subject of debate for decades.

1) The organism, called _Bacillus Anthracis,_ is grown in the lab. 2) Removed from a nutrient-rich environment, the bacteria turns into spores, which naturally clump together. 3) Spores are purified, separated, and concentrated. 4) Spores are combined with fine dust particles to maintain separation and increase time they can suspend in the air. 5) The powdery mixture is put into an envelope. 6) When released into the air, a high concentration of spores can be drawn deep into the lungs. The spores return to their bacteria state and a rapidly developing anthrax infection releases deadly toxins. (cnn.com)

Biological/chemical weaponry overview

“Biological warfare is the intentional use of disease-causing microorganisms or other entities that can replicate themselves (e.g., viruses, infectious nucleic acids and prions) against humans, animals or plants for hostile purposes. It may also involve the use of toxins: poisonous substances produced by living organisms…plants…and animals. If they are utilized for warfare purpose, the synthetically manufactured counterparts of these toxins are biological weapons.”²

Delivery of such substances can be as easy as sending it via mail, as in the anthrax example, or as sophisticated as mounting a chemical warhead onto a missile. Other possible means of delivery include introducing a substance to a water supply or through air dispersal in the form of gas.

As far back as the 6th century BC, warring nations have been involved with the use of biological weaponry.³ Despite its long history, it is perhaps best to look at more recent events.

• With the better understanding of disease in the 20th century, various forms of chemical and biological weaponry emerged. For example, during World War I, poisonous gases were used⁴ in addition to anthrax applications by German operatives.²
• Even more recently, radical groups have implemented various chemical agents with the intent of mass destruction. For example, in addition to the anthrax threat, in March of 1995, a nerve gas called sarin was released in a subway system of Japan.⁵

In such cases, it is clear that the endangerment of human life is wrong. However, stopping such activity is becoming increasingly more difficult with the continued development of chemical and biological weaponry by rogue parties and states.

Legal Issues: The Chemical Weapons Convention

In 1992, in order to curb the proliferation of chemical and biological war agents, members of the United Nations agreed upon the text of the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on Their Destruction — more simply, the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC). It is, most simply put, an extension of the Geneva Protocol of 1925 and the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention of 1972 (BTWC).

• The Geneva Protocol called for the prohibition of the use of chemical and biological weapons in war.⁶
• The BTWC outlawed biological and toxin weapons altogether and required their destruction.⁷
• What the CWC added was more specific information regarding actual chemicals as well as provisions for assistance if chemical weapons are used on a cooperating state.⁸

The CWC and like-minded protocols have given an outline for cooperating states to follow. However, it is difficult to contend with groups who do not adhere to the CWC. Because the development and use of biological weapons continue throughout rogue states, the question arises on how to deal with the situation. Under the guidelines of the CWC, cooperating nations such as the United States are not allowed to develop, produce, or use chemical weapons. As such, the use of weapons by a cooperating state should not be an issue. In order to deal with the possible use of toxins against a nation under the CWC, research for vaccines is allowed.

A Code of Ethics

Most people and nations agree that the use of biological or chemical weapons is unethical and morally wrong. So why are such weapons produced? One significant reason is that most biotechnology is dual-use, that is, it has both peaceful and harmful purposes. The same technology that gives us genetically engineered medicine can also give us military weapons.

A 2001 research study illustrates the dual-use dilemma:

In an effort to develop a contraceptive vaccine for purposes of pest control, scientists inadvertently created a potential bioweapon. Early this year, Australian researchers hypothesized that introducing a gene that creates large amounts of interleukin-4 (IL-4) into mice would stimulate antibodies against mouse eggs and render the animals infertile. IL-4 occurs naturally in the body, but an overabundance triggers an immune response. The researchers working on this study needed a vehicle to get the new gene incorporated into the mouse DNA. The scientists chose a benign mousepox virus as their vector and, to their surprise, the virus killed all of the mice in the study. IL-4 suppressed the immune system, making it unable to fight the mousepox virus. With no defensive launched by the immune system the virus was 100 percent lethal. The virus was significantly lethal even in mice vaccinated against this particular strain of mousepox. Mousepox is a virus equivalent to human smallpox. “It would be safe to assume that if some idiot did put human IL-4 into human smallpox they’d increase the lethality quite dramatically,” said Ronald J. Jackson in the Jan. 10, 2001 issue of theNew Scientist. Jackson is one of the researchers on the Australian study.⁹

When the conventions to ban such weapons were formulated, the world did not think these weapons had major military uses. Now, recent terrorist and scientific developments require stronger measures. For example:

Especially controversial is the Human Genome Diversity Project, begun in 1993 to study the genetic variation across different human populations. The project could contribute to the understanding of human genetics and the improvement of human health. However, some critics of the project fear the information may be used to create weapons to target a particular racial or ethnic group. Although many researchers conclude that ethnic biological warfare is not a practical possibility today, they nevertheless caution that it cannot be ruled out in the future.

• Weapons targeting specific varieties of plants and animals are a real possibility today. In regions where monoculture (large acreage of genetically-identical crops) is the norm, such weapons could destroy a nation’s agricultural output.

A code of ethics may prevent harmful applications of biotechnology.

One of the proposals put forth by some nations, including the U.S., is to institutionalize a code of ethics for scientists working with potentially dangerous pathogens and toxins. Scientists would be required to foresee potential dangerous applications of their work and to either discontinue the research or redirect their work. In 2002, the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) conducted an online survey (English-only sites) of how many scientific organizations worldwide had a code of ethics. The Institute discovered a code of ethics for the following:¹⁰

• 11% of 71 international scientific organizations
• 12% of 267 national or regional scientific organizations

Ethics codes currently in existence are not well publicized.

Ethics is about recognizing that there are some things we cannot and will not support or do. Codes of ethics have been around for a long time in the sciences. Perhaps the best-known one is the doctor’s Hippocratic Oath, which states “I will neither give a deadly drug to anybody if asked for it, nor will I make a suggestion to this effect.” The Stimson Center, a security think-tank organization, offers some of the reasons why ethics codes in the sciences are not well established:¹¹

• codes are not particularly well publicized
• science students are not sufficiently educated in such codes at universities
• codes that are already in place vary in form from good to poor among scientific organizations

Another consideration for a code that prohibits scientists from working on dangerous substances with potential military applications — How can scientists know in advance the outcome of their experiments or all future applications of their work? Einstein had no idea that his work would lead to the atomic bomb.

In addition to ethical codes, there are other ways to increase ethical awareness:¹⁰

Education and resources in ethics are needed.

• inclusion of ethical content and decision-making instruction in scientific curricula
• online ethical resources
• ethical awareness campaigns conducted by professional science organizations
• workshops for industry, academia, and scientists on the interface between research and business ethics
• ongoing discussion in scientific journals and the mainstream press
• accountability mechanisms and public oversight of research
• provision of confidential ethical mentoring services
• protection for whistle-blowers

Conclusion

Stronger treaty guidelines and codes of ethics should be formulated.

With the current evolution of potential threats, the issue of biological and chemical weaponry is a very important one. Ethical issues regarding war in general are a paper in and of itself. The use of weapons comes down to whether or not it is morally acceptable and ethically responsible to do harm to another person. And essentially, the destruction of human life is unacceptable in most areas of the world. Just like nuclear weapons, the potential for mass destruction using biological/toxin weapons is too great a threat. The CWC is right in imposing its guidelines. However, because the threat of biotechnological attacks exist, it is also important to develop and implement a global scientific code of conduct to curb the proliferation of such weaponry.

In conclusion: Education is the key to raise the ethical consciousness of bioscientists.

One organization, the Federation of American Scientists (FAS), believes that the education of young scientists is an important step in the elimination of weapons of mass destruction. FAS would like to see first-year science graduate students taking at least one course on the essentials of treaties, laws, regulations, and other programs designed to control biological warfare. This, FAS believes, would “raise the ethical consciousness of bioscientists, increase their awareness of the potential for hostile or dangerous exploitation of biotechnology, and persuade them of their responsibility to take action whenever possible to prevent it.”¹²

Calcutta University to roll out biotechnology course

Calcutta University (CU) is set to introduce a five-year undergraduate course in biotechnology, possibly from this academic year.

Only St Xavier’s College, an autonomous institution, now offers a five-year undergraduate course in the subject in Calcutta.

“The demand for biotechnology courses is increasing by the year. We will soon identify the colleges where an undergraduate course in the subject can be started, preferably from this year,” said CU vice-chancellor Suranjan Das.

CU’s science faculty council will meet next week to finalise the criteria that a college needs to fulfil to start the course.

The colleges that have the required infrastructure can apply for approval to start the course. The university will then send inspection teams to the colleges. “Based on the inspection report, we will decide whether a college can be allowed to start the course,” said an official.

“A college lacking in infrastructure cannot run a fullfledged biotechnology course, which calls for an in-depth study of physics, chemistry, mathematics and biological sciences. Hence, the stress on infrastructure,” said vice-chancellor Das.

Biotechnology has emerged as one of the most sought-after subjects as it offers a wide range of job opportunities in India and abroad.

Since there was no scope for studying the subject in Calcutta, students used to flock to cities outside the state where three-year undergraduate courses in biotechnology were started in 2001.

To stop the braindrain, CU had decided to a introduce a five-year undergraduate course in the subject. The approval from the University Grants Commission came in 2005 and St Xavier’s was the only college that introduced the course.

But the college has since been declared an autonomous institution and is no longer a CU affiliate.

CU pro vice-chancellor (academic) Dhrubojyoti Chattopadhyay ruled out introducing a three-year course in biotechnology, as that would not be in conformity with the state government’s policy.

A government panel on biotechnology education has stated that a three-year course would not do justice to the subject, which includes “exhaustive study” of all science disciplines.

اخبار بیوتکنولوژی - Biotechnology News

BlueFire Ethanol sees cellulosic growth in five years
US-based BlueFire Ethanol plans to build capacity to make 500-550 million gallons a year of cellulosic ethanol fuel by 2013.
>> click here for more

Eni to invest in Republic of Congo biofuels
Italy-based energy company Eni has announced a $3 billion (€1.93 billion) investment in biodiesel, oil and food production in the Republic of Congo.
>> click here for more

Work starts on Malaysia's largest biodiesel plant
Agro Biotechnology Technovation (M) (ABT) is building Malaysia's largest biodiesel plant in Kuala Lukut for RM900 million (€179 million).
>> click here for more

Biopetrol's green growth continues
Switzerland-headquartered biodiesel producer Biopetrol has issued its annual report.
>> click here for more

 

Algae-based renewable petrol hits the market
US-based Sapphire Energy has produced renewable 91 octane petrol that conforms to American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) certification, and is made from a breakthrough process that produces crude oil directly from sunlight, carbon dioxide and photosynthetic microorganisms, beginning with algae.
>> click here for more

WWF welcomes Brazil biofuel projects
The production of ethanol from sugarcane for biofuel production should have a positive impact on the environment, Worldwide Fund for Nature (WWF Brazil) says in a new report.
>> click here for more

Explosion kills worker
An explosion on 18 May at Virginia-headquartered Greenlight Biofuels' facility located in an industrial park in Princess Anne, Maryland, has killed a worker.
>> click here for more

BP to invest in green projects
UK oil group BP is investing around $8 billion (€5.15 billion) over 10 years in developing alternative and energy technologies.
>> click here for more

Largest US biodiesel refinery to open
Texas-based GreenHunter Energy is set to open the largest biodiesel refinery in the US in June at the Houston Ship Channel.
>> click here for more

Given Imaging

Given Imaging to Present at the Needham & Company, LLC Biotechnology and Medical Technology Conference

Given Imaging (NASDAQ: GIVN) today announced that Homi Shamir, President and CEO, will present at the Seventh Annual Needham & Company, LLC Biotechnology and Medical Technology Conference taking place June 11-12, 2008 in New York, NY. Mr. Shamir's presentation is scheduled for Thursday, June 12 at 1:00 pm ET.

To access a live webcast of this presentation, visit www.givenimaging.com and click 'About Given Imaging.' The webcast will be available in the Investor Relations section. A replay will be available for two weeks at the above-referenced website.

About Given Imaging Ltd.

Given Imaging is redefining gastrointestinal diagnosis by developing, producing and marketing innovative, patient-friendly products for detecting gastrointestinal disorders. The company's technology platform is the PillCam® Platform, featuring the PillCam video capsule, a disposable, miniature video camera contained in a capsule, which is ingested by the patient, a sensor array, data recorder and RAPID® software. Given Imaging has a number of available capsules: the PillCam SB video capsule to visualize the entire small intestine which is currently marketed in the United States and in more than 60 other countries; the PillCam ESO video capsule to visualize the esophagus; the Agile(TM) patency capsule to determine the free passage of the PillCam capsule in the GI tract and the PillCam COLON video capsule to visualize the colon that has been cleared for marketing in the European Union. PillCam COLON has received a CE Mark, but is not cleared for marketing or available for commercial distribution in the USA. More than 700,000 patients worldwide have benefited from the PillCam capsule endoscopy procedure. Given Imaging's headquarters, manufacturing and R&D facilities are located in Yoqneam, Israel. It has operating subsidiary companies in the United States, Germany, France, Japan, Australia and Singapore. Given Imaging's largest shareholders include Elron Electronic Industries (NASDAQ & TASE: ELRN). For more information, visit http://www.givenimaging.com.

This press release contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of the "safe harbor" provisions of the U.S. Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, projections about our business and our future revenues, expenses and profitability. Forward-looking statements may be, but are not necessarily, identified by the use of forward-looking terminology such as "may," "anticipates," "estimates," "expects," "intends," "plans," "believes," and words and terms of similar substance. Forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors which may cause the actual events, results, performance, circumstances or achievements of the Company to be materially different from any future events, results, performance, circumstances or achievements expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. Factors that could cause actual events, results, performance, circumstances or achievements to differ from such forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, the following: (1) satisfactory results of clinical trials with PillCam COLON (2) our ability to receive regulatory clearance or approval to market our products or changes in regulatory environment, (3) our success in implementing our sales, marketing and manufacturing plans, (4) protection and validity of patents and other intellectual property rights, (5) the impact of currency exchange rates, (6) the effect of competition by other companies, (7) the outcome of future litigation, including patent litigation with Olympus Corporation, (8) our ability to obtain reimbursement for our product from government and commercial payors, (9) quarterly variations in operating results, (10) the possibility of armed conflict or civil or military unrest in Israel, and (11) other risks and factors disclosed in our filings with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, including, but not limited to, risks and factors identified under such headings as "Risk Factors," "Cautionary Language Regarding Forward-Looking Statements" and "Operating Results and Financial Review and Prospects" in the Company's Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2007. You are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date of this press release. Except for the Company's ongoing obligations to disclose material information under the applicable securities laws, it undertakes no obligation to release publicly any revisions to any forward-looking statements, to report events or to report the occurrence of unanticipated events.

For further information contact:
Fern Lazar
Email Contact
David Carey
Email Contact
Lazar Partners Ltd.
1-866-GIVEN-IR

High school gets an edge on biotech

Students at Dover-Sherborn High School won't have to read about today's medical breakthroughs in a textbook years from now. This fall, they'll be conducting the experiments used in cloning and in-vitro inside their own biology lab.

more stories like this

"They've heard about stem cell research in the news; they've seen the DNA used on the crime shows," said Charlie Chicklis, head of the school's science department. "Now students can actually get involved in these labs,"

Dover-Sherborn is just one of 50 public schools across Massachusetts to receive a BioTeach grant of up to $24,000 from the Massachusetts Biotechnology Education Foundation, a nonprofit organization established in 2001 to work with the state's leading biotechnology, life sciences, and pharmaceutical companies.

The annual $1.2 million BioTeach program, supported by the state Legislature, the Massachusetts Biotechnology Council, and donations from the state's leading life science companies, aims to establish biotechnology as an integral component of the state's public high school curriculum.

This year, the recipients include Waltham and Medway high schools. Since the BioTeach program's introduction four years ago, 163 high schools across the state have received a grant.

"This is an in-depth opportunity for teachers to learn how to teach biotech," said Lance Hartford, executive director of the grant-awarding foundation. "These are things most of them didn't have the opportunity to learn when they were in school. Now their students will be able to work with things like cell transformation, and with gels that identify certain traits within cells."

The grant provides professional training this summer for teachers to learn lab curricula surrounding DNA fingerprinting, potential of bacteria, and the mystery surrounding sickle cell anemia. In addition to training, teachers will have access to professional development tools, and a comprehensive catalogue of online research. Then they will bring their new skills to the high school laboratories.

Biology teacher Greg Tucker is one of three from Dover-Sherborn High School planning to attend BioTeach summer training sessions, which are held at locations throughout the state, including Boston University and Framingham State College.

"It's exciting for the school. If it weren't for this grant, the equipment costs would certainly be an issue as we try to get into a budget," said Tucker.

The idea is that the money that goes into the high schools through BioTeach will make its way back into the state's economy.

"Biotechnology and life sciences is the largest growing sector of the economy," said Hartford.

State figures back up the claim, showing more than 43,000 residents employed in biotechnology fields. According to the state Department of Labor and Workforce Development, employment in life-science sectors grew by 15 percent between 2001 and 2006, while the overall state employment growth declined by 2.4 percent.

"The industry is concerned that there will not be enough people to keep that going," said Hartford. "We're trying to get more students involved and interested in biotech, and to understand how many careers there are out there."

A high school graduate could become an animal technician, for example. Someone with an associate's degree might turn out to be a biological technician. And one with a biotechnology-related bachelor's degree could end up a health specialist - someone who monitors and evaluates the workplace to identify and control safety and health risks.

"Biotech is so big right now, whether it's a job involving food, energy, or medicine," said Tucker.

© Copyright 2008 Globe Newspaper Company.

 

Biotechnology Pioneer

Biotechnology Pioneer Jean-Paul Clozel Named Ernst & Young World Entrepreneur Of The Year 2008

MONTE CARLO, Monaco--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Dr. Jean-Paul Clozel, founder of Switzerland’s Actelion Pharmaceuticals Ltd., a pioneering biotechnology company, was last night named the Ernst & Young World Entrepreneur Of The Year 2008 at an awards ceremony held in Monte Carlo’s Salle des Etoiles. Clozel was picked from among entrepreneurs representing more than 40 countries who were vying for the title.

Founded in 1997, Actelion is a leader in the development of small-molecule drugs for the treatment of pulmonary disease, and its products have improved the lives of patients worldwide.

Joe Schoendorf, Partner of venture capital firm Accel Partners and Chairman of the judging panel said, “Jean-Paul took huge risks leaving a big, successful company to found a new one in an incredibly difficult sector – biotechnology. And those risks have paid off, for Jean-Paul and his team, for his investors, and, most importantly, for the tens of thousands of patients Actelion’s drugs help.”

“Being named Ernst & Young World Entrepreneur Of The Year 2008 is a great honor for me and my team,” said Clozel. “To be singled out from such a strong field of entrepreneurs makes us very proud.”

“It’s amazing how quickly Jean-Paul has built Actelion from nothing to a market capitalization of nearly €4 billion in a highly competitive and complex sector,” said Greg Ericksen, Ernst & Young’s Global Vice Chair for Strategic Growth Markets. “His vision and passion have enabled him to become one of the biotechnology industry’s most recognized global success stories.”

“Entrepreneurs achieve great things and make a real difference to their customers, their employees, their communities and the global economy,” said Jim Turley, Global Chairman and CEO of Ernst & Young. “Their vision, leadership, determination and sheer hard work inspire all of my colleagues and me, and that is why we are so proud of the 22-year history of Ernst & Young Entrepreneur Of The Year. Through his leadership of Actelion, Jean-Paul has epitomized the entrepreneurial spirit, improved the lives of thousands, and is very worthy of the title Ernst & Young World Entrepreneur Of The Year 2008.”

About Jean-Paul Clozel and Actelion

Jean-Paul Clozel is a cardiologist educated in France, with further training in pharmacology and physiology at the University of Montreal, Canada, and the University of California, San Francisco. After eleven years as a clinician, he decided to move to applied research. During his 12 years at F. Hoffmann-La Roche, he was responsible for the selection of the first T-channel blocker. He also participated in the characterization of renin inhibitors as well as several endothelin receptor antagonists such as bosentan and clazosentan. Overall, the group he was heading discovered seven compounds that entered clinical trials. He has developed various, novel experimental models allowing the differentiation of these drugs, work honored with the 1997 Hoffmann-La Roche Research Prize. At the end of 1997, he founded biotechnology company Actelion, together with his wife, Martine, and work colleagues and friends Walter Fischli and Thomas Widmann. First mainly focusing on Research and Development, he became CEO of the company to bring Actelion to the public in April 2000. During his 25-year career in cardiology, he has published widely in peer-reviewed medical and scientific journals. At the same time, his passion has remained unchanged: being as closely as possible involved in bringing innovative medicine to “his” patients.

Actelion is a leader in the development of synthetic small-molecule drugs and produces the products Tracleer (bosentan), an oral treatment for WHO Class III or IV pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH), a chronic, life-threatening disorder which severely compromises the function of the lungs and heart, Zavesca (miglustat), a small-molecule oral therapy for the treatment of type 1 Gaucher disease, a genetic lipid storage disorder. Ventavis (iloprost) is an inhaled formulation of iloprost, approved for the treatment of pulmonary arterial hypertension.

About Entrepreneur Of The Year

Ernst & Young Entrepreneur Of The Year is the world’s most prestigious business award for entrepreneurs. The unique award makes a difference through the way it encourages entrepreneurial activity among those with potential, and recognizes the contribution of people who inspire others with their vision, leadership and achievement.

As the first and only truly global award of its kind Ernst & Young Entrepreneur Of The Year celebrates those who are building and leading successful, growing and dynamic businesses, recognizing them through regional, national and global awards programs in more than 135 cities in 50 countries.

About Ernst & Young

Ernst & Young is a global leader in assurance, tax, transaction and advisory services. Worldwide, our 130,000 people are united by our shared values and an unwavering commitment to quality. We make a difference by helping our people, our clients and our wider communities achieve potential.

For more information, please visit www.ey.com.

Ernst & Young refers to the global organization of member firms of Ernst & Young Global Limited, each of which is a separate legal entity. Ernst & Young Global Limited, a UK company limited by guarantee, does not provide services to clients.

Contacts

Ernst & Young Global PR
Kevin Russell
[phone] / [phone]
[e-mail]