Traduction de «Michael Smith Prize in Health Research » (Anglais → Français) :

Dr. Michael J. Chandler, University of British Columbia Professor and Distinguished Canadian Institutes for Health Research (CIHR) and Michael Smith Foundation for Health Research (MSFHR) Investigator

– We broadly supported the draft report and submitted a series of amendments which have mostly been included, for instance: an emphasis on green priority objectives: energy and climate change, resource efficiency, regeneration of biological resources and promoting social cohesion; addressing eco-innovation at all stages, including design, through the adoption of a properly funded and ambitious eco-innovation action plan, as well as the adoption of a strategy for promoting product/service systems and function-oriented business models; promoting the use of open standards as drivers for innovation and open access to publicly funded research, as well as focusin ...[+++]g public financing on socially valuable fields where knowledge is created as a public good, such as inducement prizes in the health sector (we also tried, with varying degrees of success, to propose better wording for IPR issues); we managed to retain the wording welcoming the Commission’s efforts to prevent IPR from constituting a barrier to competition and innovation.

Genome B.C. has raised the other half, about $136 million, with the help of partners, including the provincial government, the Michael Smith Foundation for Health Research, Western Economic Development, and a number of national and international co-funders, research institutions, and private sector businesses on the research projects.

3. Points out that pharmaceutical research is failing in its duty towards people in developing countries and that it should focus much more effort on fatal diseases such as tuberculosis; believes that the EU should encourage research funding through innovative means, such as awarding prizes to medicines which are the most beneficial to public health;

For us radicals, today’s choice should be clear: ‘no’ to the Fiori report as it stands; ‘yes’ to most of the amendments tabled, to achieve freedom of scientific research; ‘yes’ to all kinds of therapeutic research that can give life and not death to the life that really exists, not that which is only present in textbooks and now lies in laboratory freezers, waiting to be destroyed; and so ‘yes’ to research on stem cells, which are, in practical terms, more malleable; ‘yes’ to research on supernumerary embryos that have no chance of life; ‘yes’ to therapeutic cloning, which – as stated authoritatively by the Nobel Prize-winner, Profe ...[+++]ssor Dulbecco, only yesterday and the former Italian health minister Mr Veronesi today – has nothing whatever to do with human cloning; in short, ‘yes’ to an adult, secular Europe that is responsible in the matter of research.

To in fill in the gaps, we developed a research project in B.C. and submitted it to the Michael Smith Foundation for Health Research.