Technology Innovation and Global Health 1: Biomedical Sciences

I think Alan Kay said it best, "The best way to predict the future is to invent it."

In regards to the "Top Ten Biotechnologies for Improving Health in Developing Countries," I agree with the top 3, especially in regards to recombinant technology for vaccine development and technology for more efficient drug/vaccine delivery.

This article definitely promotes prevention and health and proves that biotechnology can be made affordable. I do agree with Kat on the fact that the article focused too much on the top three. This article definitely is key to encouraging the development of technologies for improving health in developing countries.

I thought Farah's article, "Genomics and Global Health: Solutions in Development," was so interesting!

Bioremediation is so clever! I am surprised it is not more common. Yes it is slow, does require specific environmental conditions, and not yet viable for complex chemicals, but why should that hold us back from using it as a supplement to the usual toxic waste removals that we traditionally use now and help alleviate global warming? The bacteria, yeast, and fungi are cheap and not harmful to the environment.

Genetically modified crops is definitely another great biotechnology that should be used more often. It definitely helps micronutrient malnutrition in various countries and assures sustainability. The main opponent is definitely those who favor organic foods. Yes genetically modified crops are not natural, but they are definitely helping out nature and providing people in developing countries with nutrients they would otherwise have no access to.

What still confuses me is combinatorial chemistry. It seems like a great tool and could be useful, but how common will it really be? How universal will it be? Is it really applicable? It definitely is interesting and seems promising.

I strongly believe that public-private partnerships are the only way that biotechnologies will spread quickly and become universal. The private will have the funds and expertise while the public has the influence for implementation.

In response to Farah's question, "When great drugs are already out there not being disseminated properly, should we be putting billions of dollars into R&D for new drugs?" I think we should keep putting some money in R&D for new drugs but take some of the budget and put it in R&D for disseminating great current drugs. It is sad that there are so many great drugs let alone 1 that are proven to be extremely effective and beneficial for all that are not being utilized due to the poor methods of dissemination.

This ties into the diffusion of innovations. It is sad to see that lots of great idea do not cross "The chasm" This definitely proves that the way you market your innovation is how the innovation will diffuse into the public and become mainstream. With changing technologies and shifting from the old to the new, I think compatibility is the most important. The innovation needs to be able to coexist with technologies and social patterns already in place in order for ease of adoption and changing the opinions of critics (late majority and laggards).